| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: savepoint improvements |
| Date: | 2007-01-22 17:06:00 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150701220906j6970b115jfa9c6a17bfbc49a3@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/22/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'm getting tired of repeating this, but: neither of you have said
> anything that doesn't appear to me to be handled by ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK.
> What exactly is lacking in that feature?
* the ability to span the savepoint across multiple statements.
* the ability to get what you want without wastefully creating a
savepoint before every statement.
* losing some behavior which (IMO) is general and beneficial. how do
psql tricks help proper stored procedures should we aver get them?
That being said, some simple extensions to the psql rollback feature
would get the job done I guess. I'm still not happy with it but I
knew it was a tough go from the beginning...I appreciate everyone's
comments.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-01-22 17:18:46 | Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum Improvements |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-01-22 16:22:37 | Re: savepoint improvements |