From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Nested Transaction TODO list |
Date: | 2004-07-04 04:11:24 |
Message-ID: | 20040704041123.GB20039@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:12:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I haven't looked at JDBC, but at least in the libpq code, what we could
> >> safely do is extend the existing no transaction/in transaction/in failed
> >> transaction field to provide a five-way distinction: those three cases
> >> plus in subtransaction/in failed subtransaction.
>
> > This will break the existing JDBC driver in nonobvious ways: the current
> > code silently ignores unhandled transaction states in ReadyForQuery,
>
> Drat. Scratch that plan then. (Still, silently ignoring unrecognized
> states probably wasn't a good idea for the JDBC code...)
What about using the command tag of SUBBEGIN &c ?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
Hi! I'm a .signature virus!
cp me into your .signature file to help me spread!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2004-07-04 08:10:24 | Re: LinuxTag wrapup |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-07-04 04:10:52 | Re: LinuxTag wrapup |