From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Transaction aborts on syntax error. |
Date: | 2004-02-09 15:30:13 |
Message-ID: | 19671.1076340613@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> So you picture the backend automatically introducing a mini-nested-transaction
> for every request and automatically rolling that back on any error. So the
> application or user wouldn't have to do anything to continue processing
> ignoring the error?
You're assuming a bunch of facts not in evidence about how we choose to
present this functionality to clients, including a rather dubious
assumption that we'd choose to break backward compatibility.
My guess is that there will be some way to get the above behavior
(possibly implemented by client-library code rather than the backend),
but that it won't be the default.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-02-09 15:37:38 | Re: [HACKERS] dollar quoting |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-02-09 14:58:12 | Re: psql variables |