From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Automatic transactions in psql |
Date: | 2002-02-07 18:40:34 |
Message-ID: | 14614.1013107234@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> This is an interesting idea, although you may want to give the user the
> option to customize his prompt.
Seems cool. I am a bit worried about whether the transaction-block
detection mechanism is reliable, though. We might need to add something
to the FE/BE protocol to make this work correctly.
>> Secondly, it adds a "begin transaction" option that, when
>> enabled, ensures that you are always inside a transaction
>> while in psql, so you can always rollback.
> This should be done in the backend.
Agreed. If I recall recent discussions correctly, the spec says that
certain SQL commands should open a transaction and others should not.
It's not reasonable to have that logic in psql rather than the backend.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2002-02-07 18:40:53 | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-07 17:58:50 | Re: Suggestions for 7.3 date handling |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-07 19:05:35 | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |
Previous Message | Patrick Macdonald | 2002-02-07 14:59:17 | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |