| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rafal Pietrak <rafal(at)zorro(dot)isa-geek(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Feature discussion: Should syntax errors abort a transaction? |
| Date: | 2012-06-22 23:07:52 |
| Message-ID: | 1340406472.16713.38.camel@sussancws0025 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 00:24 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> I guess it seems to me that I would not object to a new option for
> transaction behavior where one could do something like SET TRANSACTION
> INTERACTIVE; and have no errors abort the transaction at all (explicit
> commit or rollback required) but I would complain loudly if this were
> to be the default, and I don't see a real need for it.
It's already available in psql. See ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/app-psql.html
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-06-23 00:11:53 | Re: retrieving function raise messages in ecpg embedded sql code |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-22 21:09:42 | Re: insert select fails inside of function |