Re: PL/SQL Function: self-contained transaction?

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  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?