From: | Mike Benoit <ipso(at)snappymail(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
Cc: | Thomas Swan <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All |
Date: | 2004-07-01 23:47:09 |
Message-ID: | 1088725629.31430.89.camel@ipso.snappymail.ca |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2004-07-01 at 18:38 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 02:01:37PM -0500, Thomas Swan wrote:
> > Is there going to be an option to abort the complete transaction without
> > knowing how deep you are? Perhaps something like "ABORT ALL".
> >
> > The reason I suggest this, is that I can foresee an application or user
> > leaving nested transactions open inadvertently, or not knowing how
> > deeply nested they are when they are called. It's just a thought, and I
> > didn't recall any mention of something like it on the list.
>
> If we change the syntax, say by using SUBCOMMIT/SUBABORT for
> subtransactions, then using a simple ABORT would abort the whole
> transaction tree.
>
But then we're back to the application having to know if its in a
regular transaction or a sub-transaction aren't we? To me that sounds
just as bad.
"ABORT ALL" sure would be nice.
--
Mike Benoit <ipso(at)snappymail(dot)ca>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Holdoway | 2004-07-02 00:24:23 | transactions within functions |
Previous Message | Mark Wu | 2004-07-01 23:38:19 | working on support triggers on columns |