From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pavel Golub <pavel(at)gf(dot)microolap(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Named transaction |
Date: | 2009-06-17 21:16:24 |
Message-ID: | 4A395D28.6050801@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>
>> Yes, but some other followups suggest that maybe a "named
>> transaction" does something else entirely. Thus my request for a
>> definition of what the OP is actually asking for.
>>
>
> Well, a quick google search suggests that all three guesses here were
> off base. This is the best clue I could find with a two-minute
> perusal:
>
> # TRANSACTION_HANDLE -> use a named transaction. Firebird allows
> # multiple transactions per connection. In the case below, this
> # request is run in the system transaction - not available outside the
> # engine. The system transaction number is 0 and it is
> # "pre-committed" meaning that its changes are immediately visible to
> # all other transactions.
>
> Does that send a nasty chill up anyone else's spine?
>
>
>
Well, it does even more when you read in the docs that Firebase DDL can
*only* take place in the context of the system transaction.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2009-06-17 22:26:00 | Re: Named transaction |
Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2009-06-17 20:22:51 | Cannot use all four trigger events at once |