| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Michael Loftis <mloftis(at)wgops(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Date: | 2002-04-10 04:42:59 |
| Message-ID: | 1524.1018413779@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Actually, we could probably prevent transaction abort on syntax(yacc)
> errors, but the other errors like mistyped table names would be hard to
> prevent a rollback, so I guess we just roll back on any error.
I don't think that what we categorize as an error or not is very
relevant to the discussion, either. The real point is: should SET
have rollback behavior similar to other SQL commands, or not?
If we had savepoints, or ignorable syntax errors, or other frammishes
this question would still be the same.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-04-10 06:09:20 | Re: BETWEEN SYMMETRIC/ASYMMETRIC |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-10 04:35:43 | Re: BETWEEN SYMMETRIC/ASYMMETRIC |