| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | fn ln <emuser20140816(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15977: Inconsistent behavior in chained transactions |
| Date: | 2019-09-05 21:11:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20190905211135.q63scps3pvrc3i43@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2019-09-05 14:16:11 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-09-04 16:49, fn ln wrote:
> > I made another patch for suggested behavior (COMMIT/ROLLBACK AND CHAIN
> > now gives us an error when used in an implicit block).
>
> I'm content with this patch.
Would need tests.
> Better disable questionable cases now and maybe re-enable them later
> if someone wants to make a case for it.
I do think the fact that COMMIT in multi-statement implicit transaction
has some usecase, is an argument for just implementing it properly...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-09-05 21:31:52 | Re: ERROR: multixact X from before cutoff Y found to be still running |
| Previous Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2019-09-05 20:08:11 | Re: ERROR: multixact X from before cutoff Y found to be still running |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-09-05 21:31:52 | Re: ERROR: multixact X from before cutoff Y found to be still running |
| Previous Message | James Coleman | 2019-09-05 21:10:19 | Re: Misleading comment in tuplesort_set_bound |