| From: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mike Rylander <miker(at)purplefrog(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All |
| Date: | 2004-07-10 19:46:00 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0407102139250.2838-100000@zigo.dhs.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> That's why it's absurd. Why allow an operation which isn't really an
> operation?
Same reason why you allow an addition with 0. One can say that it's
not really an operation either.
One can have many different semantics, here are 3 versions:
1) You release savepoints in any order
2) You release savepoints in reverse order
3) You release any savepoints and later ones then the
one you released are automatically released.
I don't see any of these as absurd. The ansi spec uses number 3.
It might seem absurd to you, given the implementation you have made.
--
/Dennis Björklund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-07-10 19:56:34 | Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-07-10 19:42:55 | Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All |