Re: Questions regarding interaction of stored functions

From: Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Questions regarding interaction of stored functions
Date: 2005-03-27 23:39:42
Message-ID: 20050327183942.100df4c4.wmoran@potentialtech.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> writes:
> > Let's take the following fictional scenerio:
>
> > BEGIN;
> > INSERT INTO table1 VALUES ('somestring');
> > INSERT INTO table1 VALUES ('anotherstring');
> > SELECT user_defined_function();
> > COMMIT;
>
> > In this case, user_defined_function() does a lot more table manipulation.
> > I don't want that to be done if any statement prior fails, but it seems as
> > if it's always done, regardless. It seems as if the second INSERT is not
> > executed if the first fails, but the function is always called.
>
> Sorry, I don't believe a word of that. If the first insert fails,
> everything will be rejected until COMMIT.
>
> Possibly you need to show a less fictionalized version of your problem.

You're right, Tom. I can't get a simplified reproduction of the problem.

That means that the problem is occurring somewhere else in my program.

--
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Guy Rouillier 2005-03-27 23:42:58 Re: dblinks?
Previous Message Bricklen Anderson 2005-03-27 23:34:11 Re: plpgsql no longer exists