Re: Is replacing transactions with CTE a good idea?

From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is replacing transactions with CTE a good idea?
Date: 2021-04-01 15:04:29
Message-ID: 02654280-7b22-1231-8de7-c74a1a62e426@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 4/1/21 8:58 AM, Brian Dunavant wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:49 AM Glen Huang <heyhgl(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:heyhgl(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> If I decide to replace all my transaction code with CTE, will I
> shoot myself in the foot down the road?
>
>
> I do this all the time and makes code way cleaner.   It's very
> straightforward with inserts queries.  When you deal with
> updates/deletes, things can be trickier.  I usually leave these in a
> transaction if there is any concern.
>
> They can also be hard for future programmers that may not understand
> SQL.  Make sure you comment your queries for maintainability long term.
>
> I have yet to regret replacing a transaction with a CTE over the past
> decade.  YMMV
This must assume auto-commit mode where every single statement is
"committed"?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Glen Huang 2021-04-01 15:06:32 Re: Is replacing transactions with CTE a good idea?
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2021-04-01 15:04:04 Re: Is replacing transactions with CTE a good idea?