| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Adrian Maier <adrian(dot)maier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: concurrent transactions inside the same connection |
| Date: | 2006-04-19 10:25:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20060419102530.GF15420@svana.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 12:31:23PM +0300, Adrian Maier wrote:
> Hello hackers,
>
> I have included below a fragment of a discussion from the freepascal mailing
> list. Apparently, some folks expect to be able to start multiple transactions
> inside the *same* database connection. Since this is not possible in postgres,
> they would be forced to start more connections from the same application.
>
> Is such a feature possible to be implemented someday ?
It's not clear what the use case is. Given the original problem was
excised from the email it's not clear what they're trying to solve.
Transactions can "nest", sort of.
> My feeling is that this is a false problem, caused by some interbase/firebird
> or delphi habits . But ... the poster claims that Oracle and SqlServer
> have such a feature ( Oracle has 'named' transactions - but these
> names seem to be just labels ) - is this true ?
I beleive oracle can have independant subtransactions. That's something
different from several concurrent transaction though. I'm not oracle
expert though.
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-19 14:52:51 | Re: how can i get the binary format of timestamp? |
| Previous Message | Albe Laurenz | 2006-04-19 09:43:58 | Re: concurrent transactions inside the same connection |