Re: InitPostgres and flatfiles question

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: InitPostgres and flatfiles question
Date: 2007-01-04 15:36:48
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> writes:
> I've just found the stumbling block: the -c option of psql wraps all in
> a transaction, as man psql says:
> ...
> Thank you for clarification, I wouldn't have expected that (especially
> because CREATE DATABASE itself says, it cannot be run inside a
> transaction block... A transaction block (with BEGIN and COMMIT) seems
> to be more than just a transaction, right?)

Hm, that's an interesting point. psql's -c just shoves its whole
argument string at the backend in one PQexec(), instead of dividing
at semicolons as psql does with normal input. And so it winds up as
a single transaction because postgres.c doesn't force a transaction
commit until the end of the querystring. But that's not a "transaction
block" in the normal sense and so it doesn't trigger the
PreventTransactionChain defense in CREATE DATABASE and elsewhere.

I wonder whether we ought to change that? The point of
PreventTransactionChain is that we don't want the user rolling back
the statement post-completion, but it seems that
psql -c 'CREATE DATABASE foo; ABORT; BEGIN; ...'
would bypass the check.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-01-04 15:37:59 Odd numeric->float4/8 casting behaviour
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-01-04 15:26:50 Re: Tabs or Spaces