From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Vote on SET in aborted transaction |
Date: | 2002-04-23 16:27:31 |
Message-ID: | 200204231627.g3NGRVq11398@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
OK, would people please vote on how to handle SET in an aborted
transaction? This vote will allow us to resolve the issue and move
forward if needed.
In the case of:
SET x=1;
BEGIN;
SET x=2;
query_that_aborts_transaction;
SET x=3;
COMMIT;
at the end, should 'x' equal:
1 - All SETs are rolled back in aborted transaction
2 - SETs are ignored after transaction abort
3 - All SETs are honored in aborted transaction
? - Have SETs vary in behavior depending on variable
Our current behavior is 2.
Please vote and I will tally the results.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jean-Paul ARGUDO | 2002-04-23 16:40:23 | Re: cvs update, configure, make, error in bootstrap.* ?... |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-23 16:19:21 | Re: [HACKERS] WITH DELIMITERS in COPY |