Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows

From: Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>
To: Richard Broersma <richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, Justin Pitts <justinpitts(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows
Date: 2010-12-07 20:10:28
Message-ID: 20101207201028.GE4028@aart.is.rice.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 11:56:51AM -0800, Richard Broersma wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> wrote:
>
> > In PG the first statement you fire off (like an "insert into" for example)
> > will start a transaction. ?If you dont commit before you disconnect that
> > transaction will be rolled back. ?Even worse, if your program does not
> > commit, but keeps the connection to the db open, the transaction will stay
> > open too.
>
> Huh - is this new? I always thought that every statement was wrapped
> in its own transaction unless you explicitly start your own. So you
> shouldn't need to commit before closing a connection if you never
> opened a transaction to begin with.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Richard Broersma Jr.
>

The default of autocommit unless explicitly starting a transaction with
BEGIN is the normal behavior that I have seen as well.

Cheers,
Ken

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mladen Gogala 2010-12-07 20:22:15 Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows
Previous Message Gary Doades 2010-12-07 19:58:37 Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows