|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|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
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.
|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|