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: | elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1118: Misleading Commit message |
Date: | 2004-07-10 19:31:03 |
Message-ID: | 19617.1089487863@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>> I am not excited about changing the command tag.
>>
>> I was not either to start with, but the more I think about it, the more
>> I think it would be a good idea.
> What tag would we use? ABORT?
No, ROLLBACK, which is what you get when you give the "expected"
command.
regression=# begin;
BEGIN
regression=# select 1/0;
ERROR: division by zero
regression=# abort; -- or rollback;
ROLLBACK
regression=# begin;
BEGIN
regression=# select 1/0;
ERROR: division by zero
regression=# commit;
COMMIT
I think the above is fairly misleading; it would be better to say
ROLLBACK to indicate that we had in fact canceled the transaction.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-10 23:31:34 | Re: BUG #1189: unbounded string copy in postmaster |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-10 18:44:11 | Re: BUG #1188: evaluation order of select seems to be wrong |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-10 19:33:14 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1118: Misleading Commit message |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-10 19:23:31 | Re: Weird new time zone |