Re: Transaction Handling in pl/pgsql

From: "Craig Bryden" <postgresql(at)bryden(dot)co(dot)za>
To: "Douglas McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
Cc: "pgsql" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Transaction Handling in pl/pgsql
Date: 2005-07-12 18:54:59
Message-ID: 002701c58713$34367640$0200a8c0@amd2800
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanks a stack. That has answered by question.

Craig

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
To: "Craig Bryden" <postgresql(at)bryden(dot)co(dot)za>
Cc: "pgsql" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Transaction Handling in pl/pgsql

> "Craig Bryden" <postgresql(at)bryden(dot)co(dot)za> writes:
>
> > OK. I have read that. The part that sticks out is "A block containing an
> > EXCEPTION clause is significantly more expensive to enter and exit than
a
> > block without one. Therefore, don't use EXCEPTION without need. ".
> > Performance is paramount to me.
> >
> > If I ommit the EXCEPTION clause will all the statements still be rolled
back
> > if an error occurs?
>
> Yes, if you don't use EXCEPTION clauses the behavior is the same as
> previous versions.
>
> -Doug
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-07-12 18:57:12 Re: FW: index bloat
Previous Message Douglas McNaught 2005-07-12 18:46:18 Re: Transaction Handling in pl/pgsql