From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
Cc: | Sam Vilain <sam(at)vilain(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [spf:guess] Re: ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT |
Date: | 2010-05-27 06:26:39 |
Message-ID: | 4BFE109F.6050104@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27/05/10 03:25, Florian Pflug wrote:
> On May 27, 2010, at 0:58 , Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> On 26/05/10 02:00, Sam Vilain wrote:
>>> Florian Pflug wrote:
>>>> On May 25, 2010, at 12:18 , Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>>> Releasing the newer savepoint will cause the older one to again become accessible, as the doc says, but rolling back to a savepoint does not implicitly release it. You'll have to use RELEASE SAVEPOINT for that.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, now I get it. Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Would changing "Releasing the newer savepoint will cause ... " to "Explicitly releasing the newer savepoint" or maybe even "Explicitly releasing the newer savepoint with RELEASE SAVEPOINT will cause ..." make things clearer?
>>>
>>> Yes, probably - your misreading matches my misreading of it :-)
>>
>> +1.
>
> Patch that changes the wording to "Explicitly releasing the newer savepoint with RELEASE SAVEPOINT will cause ..." is attached.
Thanks, committed. I left out the "Explicitly", though, because as Sam
pointed out the newer savepoint can also be implicitly released by
rolling back to an earlier savepoint.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-05-27 06:48:53 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-05-27 06:21:58 | Re: Synchronization levels in SR |