Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Manfred Koizar" <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff
Date: 2003-04-01 17:38:23
Message-ID: 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961F71@m0114.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> In fact, I had proposed a simpler UNDO capability that revisited tuples
> and set their XID to a fixed aborted XID to clean up aborted
> subtransactions, but most now like the multiple XID solution.

I think for the implicit subtransactions that we will want
(with error codes comming) using a different xid for every command
inside a transaction is not so sexy, no ?

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Wampler 2003-04-01 17:40:24 Re: PostgreSQL and SOAP, suggestions?
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD 2003-04-01 17:32:24 Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff