Re: chained transactions

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: chained transactions
Date: 2018-10-02 05:38:54
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 08:21:20PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Oh, is that all it does? That's disappointing, because that's a lot less
> powerful than how I understand chained transactions. And at the same time
> relieving, because that's a lot simpler to implement :-).
> In Gray & Reuter's classic book, Transaction Processing, they describe
> chained transactions so that you also keep locks and cursors. Unfortunately
> I don't have a copy at hand, but that's my recollection, at least. I guess
> the SQL standard committee had a different idea.

The patch set does not apply anymore, so this patch is moved to next CF,
waiting on author.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-10-02 05:43:12 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] WIP Add ALWAYS DEFERRED option for constraints
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-10-02 05:27:17 Re: Allow to specify a index name as ANALYZE parameter