From: | Ben Adida <ben(at)openforce(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tim Perdue <tperdue(at)valinux(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Re: haven't forgotten about you...] |
Date: | 2000-08-11 04:54:09 |
Message-ID: | 399386F1.BE4B8299@openforce.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tim Perdue wrote:
> Great - I assume end transaction is going to do a commit. If you don't
> do an end transaction and you don't issue a rollback... I assume it
> rolls back?
Yes, when I said end transaction, I meant commit.
The precise behavior you're inquiring about is dependent on your web server
/ driver setup. In AOLserver's Postgres driver, if a database handle is
released when a transaction is still open, the transaction is rolled back.
I can imagine other drivers behaving differently, but implicit commits
sound very dangerous to me.
> This is pretty slick - over the last month or so I've come up with about
> 8 different places where I really wish I had transactions/rollbacks on
> SourceForge. Also running into lots of places where I really, really
> wish I had fscking subselects...
Yes, Postgres is definitely pretty slick...
-Ben
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Swan | 2000-08-11 05:16:20 | unsubscribe |
Previous Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-08-11 04:39:11 | Re: Arrays and foreign keys |