| From: | Alban Hertroys <alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tyson Lloyd Thwaites <tyson(dot)lloydthwaites(at)allianza(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Webb Sprague <webb(dot)sprague(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [RESEND] Transaction auto-abort causes grief with Spring Framework |
| Date: | 2007-08-17 10:27:34 |
| Message-ID: | 46C57816.5070809@magproductions.nl |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tyson Lloyd Thwaites wrote:
> I am not opposed to introducing checkpoints to our API, but it would be
> nicer if I didn't have to. At the moment I have resigned myself to
> turning off spring declarative txns for certain methods, and handling
> them manually by doing multiple txn blocks. In the above example
> however, the bit that I want to allow to fail is inside a method that
> would have to be wrapped in a transaction.... .... see the web of
> complexity that is growing?
Isn't the 'try' statement rather similar to a 'savepoint' command? I
realize it would be difficult to override the behaviour of try {...}
catch (...) {...}, but it shouldn't be too hard to wrap it somehow for
exceptions in database code.
--
Alban Hertroys
alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl
magproductions b.v.
T: ++31(0)534346874
F: ++31(0)534346876
M:
I: www.magproductions.nl
A: Postbus 416
7500 AK Enschede
// Integrate Your World //
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Amiel | 2007-08-17 10:28:15 | Postmaster does not shut down |
| Previous Message | Mikko Partio | 2007-08-17 10:18:35 | Re: PostgreSQL clustering (shared disk) |