Cursors and Transactions, why?

From: Eric Ridge <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com>
To: Pgsql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Cursors and Transactions, why?
Date: 2004-04-05 20:57:11
Message-ID: CF4BA056-8743-11D8-91AB-000A95BB5944@tcdi.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Why must a cursor be defined in an open transaction? Obviously there's
a good reason, but I can't figure it out. On a high level, what would
be involved in allowing a cursor to outlive the transaction that
created it?

Cursors seem as if they have some nice performance benefits (esp. if
you're not using all rows found), but their usefulness drops
considerably since you must leave a transaction open.

eric

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Koizar 2004-04-05 21:09:49 Re: Large DB
Previous Message William White 2004-04-05 20:42:45 left and overleft/notright revisited: why !>> and !<< might be poor names