From: | "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "PGSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | "Reg Me Please" <regmeplease(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "Dennis Brakhane" <brakhane(at)googlemail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Transactions within a function body |
Date: | 2008-10-02 15:30:52 |
Message-ID: | 65937bea0810020830h1f3d780an94b6e9cdba312f64@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>wrote:
> Reg Me Please escribió:
> > Il Thursday 02 October 2008 16:15:10 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
>
> > > You can nest blocks arbitrarily, giving you the chance to selectively
> > > rollback pieces of the function. It's only a bit more awkward.
> >
> > You mean I can issue a ROLLBACK command within a BEGIN...END; block to
> roll it
> > back?
>
> No -- I mean you can use BEGIN/EXCEPTION/END blocks as you like, nesting
> them or putting one after another. Complementing this with RAISE
> EXCEPTION you can cause savepoints to roll back at will.
I have seen this feature being asked for, and this work-around suggested so
many times. If plpgql does it internally, why not provide a clean interface
for this? Is there some road-block, or that nobody has ever tried it?
If there are no known limitations, I'd like to start work on it.
Best regards,
--
gurjeet[(dot)singh](at)EnterpriseDB(dot)com
singh(dot)gurjeet(at){ gmail | hotmail | indiatimes | yahoo }.com
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew Terenzio | 2008-10-02 15:31:23 | Re: tsearch 2 query |
Previous Message | Bob Henkel | 2008-10-02 15:30:40 | Re: Transactions within a function body |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2008-10-02 15:32:16 | Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-02 15:28:13 | Re: Transactions within a function body |