Re: NT + deadlock intended behaviour ?

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> First of all, let me point that the behavior on deadlock has been agreed
> to change. Instead of only aborting the innermost transaction, it will
> abort the whole transaction tree.

Who agreed to that? Your example is entirely unconvincing --- deadlock
is very far from being the only failure that will recur indefinitely,
if an app writer is so foolish as to code an indefinite retry loop.
Any simple illegal-data-value error will act the same.

I do not think declaring by fiat that certain types of errors abort the
whole tree is acceptable from the user end or reasonable from the
implementation end.

regards, tom lane