Re:

Thanks for clarifying that, Dave. In the absence of useful error codes from the backend, would it
be possible to simply add an "exceptionThrown" flag in an appropriate place, which gets set when a
SQLException is thrown in a transaction? Then, if the client code attempts to execute any further
statements in that transaction, the driver could check the flag and give a clear exception to the
effect of "Sorry, an exception already occurred in this transaction, you have to rollback before
you can do anything else reliably with this connection."

Regards,

Karl

--- Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net> wrote:
> Unfortunately, until the backend gives us usefull error codes, there's
> not much we can do about catching exceptions intelligently.
>
> And yes, the behaviour is intended, once a transaction has failed, you
> need to end, or roll it back
>
> Dave
> On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 12:19, Karl Goldstein wrote:
> > I don't have a strong opinion either way. For me, the main problem with the current behavior
> is
> > simply that the error message is confusing. If it is indeed the case that any SQLException
> > invalidates the current transaction (and my impression is that this is not intended), then the
> > driver should report that directly and not even let you try to execute later statements. The
> "No
> > results were returned by the query" error just left me scratching my head.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Karl
> >
> > --- Daniel Serodio <daniel(at)checkforte(dot)com(dot)br> wrote:
> > > I've never worked with Oracle, just MySQL and PostgreSQL, but isn't this
> > > the definition of a transaction?
> > >
> > > "A transaction is an atomic unit of processing; it is eigher performed
> > > in its entirety or not at all"
> > >
> > > My understanding of this is that if one statement failed, all of the
> > > following statements should fail.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 14:31, Csaba Nagy wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I was wondering if there's any chance of this behavior to change in the
> > > > future ?
> > > > I mean will it be possible to continue a transaction after one of the SQLs
> > > > failed, by only rolling back what that query did ?
> > > > In many real life applications recovery is very possible after a failed
> > > > query, and (the not failed part of) the transaction should be committed.
> > > > This is one of the big differences in behavior between Postgres and Oracle,
> > > > making life hard for porting...
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Csaba.
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
> > http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org
> --
> Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/