AW: AW: AW: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Cc: "'hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: AW: AW: AW: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS
Date: 2000-02-24 16:43:40
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C604AF7CF9@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> > I suspect that most applications don't notice the difference. Most
> > will catch errors and roll back the current transaction, because that's
> > the logical thing to do in most cases.
>
> You are assuming that the app has the intelligence to do so. A psql
> script, for example, lacks that intelligence.

I thought that psql is the only frontend that would not have a problem
with the new behavior, because it now has the feature of "exit on first
error"
and thus rolls back the last open transaction anyway.

> I do agree that this is an area where we need to do some work, but
> it's not going to be a simple or small change. We will need nested-
> transaction support in the backend, and some very careful rethinking
> of the client interfaces to try to avoid breaking existing apps.

Yes, unfortunately.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rolf Grossmann 2000-02-24 16:44:15 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] First experiences with Postgresql 7.0
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-02-24 16:42:06 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] First experiences with Postgresql 7.0