| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rollback on Error |
| Date: | 2004-09-14 09:56:42 |
| Message-ID: | 200409141156.42492.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paesold wrote:
> I though the postgres behaviour of rolling back the whole transaction
> was standard?
No.
> If that is not the case, I don't understand why core
> seems to be against a mode (GUC), where an implicit savepoint is
> generated before each statement so that "rollback of the last
> statement" would be possible.
Because it's dangerous in noninteractive mode. When you send a
transaction to the server, you don't want some statements be left out.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Klint Gore | 2004-09-14 10:04:10 | logging rule execution? |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2004-09-14 09:53:16 | Re: Rollback on Error |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paesold | 2004-09-14 10:11:10 | Re: Rollback on Error |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2004-09-14 09:53:16 | Re: Rollback on Error |