From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PL/SQL Function: self-contained transaction? |
Date: | 2005-08-22 18:20:00 |
Message-ID: | 8764txj0kv.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> In PostgreSQL, as everyone knows, a QUERY == a transaction, unless wrap'd in a
> BEGIN/END explicitly ... how does that work with a function? is there an
> implicit BEGIN/END around the whole transaction, or each QUERY within the
> function itself?
The whole outer query issued from your frontend is in one transaction.
> If the whole function (and all QUERYs inside of it) are considered one
> transaction, can you do a begin/end within the function itself to 'force'
> commit on a specific part of the function?
Functions cannot issue start or end transactions. They're a creature of the
transaction you're in when you call them. Otherwise it wouldn't make sense to
be able to call them from within a query.
There is some discussion of "stored procedures" which would live outside of
transactions and be able to create transactions, commit, and roll them back.
But I don't think any of that work is committed yet. I'm not even sure it's
been written yet.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lane Van Ingen | 2005-08-22 19:50:37 | Why Doesn't SQL This Expression Work? |
Previous Message | A. Kretschmer | 2005-08-22 18:15:08 | Re: PL/SQL Function: self-contained transaction? |