Re: Rollback on Error

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Rollback on Error
Date: 2004-09-15 13:57:41
Message-ID: 3119.1095256661@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

"Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> writes:
>>> 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 we learned our lesson with the ill-fated autocommit GUC
>> variable. You can't have fundamental transactional semantics depending
>> on the phase of the moon, but from the point of view of application
>> code, anything that can be flipped as easily as a GUC variable is an
>> unknown.

> On the other hand, the scenario of a psql option (read: I have given up the
> idea of a backend implementation) to rollback only last statement on error
> is quite different.

Sure (and we already have one for autocommit). But I thought you were
asking about a backend implementation.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-09-15 14:08:47 Re: Checking regex pattern validity
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-09-15 13:55:00 Re: fedora core2 pgaccess

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James Robinson 2004-09-15 13:59:28 Re: Statement parsing problem ?
Previous Message Chris Dunlop 2004-09-15 13:43:47 Statement parsing problem ?