| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PREPARE TRANSACTION and webapps |
| Date: | 2005-11-16 05:34:58 |
| Message-ID: | 1901.1132119298@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> What this would actually be useful for is a fair question
>> though --- what's it do that you don't have now?
> I think what they want to do is make the database concept of transactions
> match up 1-1 with their application's concept of transactions. Which may span
> multiple stateless http requests.
[ itch... ] This seems to me to fly right in the face of the
oft-repeated advice that you don't hold a transaction open while the
user thinks about it, goes off to lunch, vacations in the Bahamas, etc.
The question remains: what problem are we solving that actually
should be solved?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-11-16 05:58:43 | Re: PREPARE TRANSACTION and webapps |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-11-16 05:19:46 | Re: PREPARE TRANSACTION and webapps |