| From: | Jerry Sievers <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Ravi Krishna <srkrishna1(at)aol(dot)com>, adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Oracle vs PG |
| Date: | 2018-10-24 09:40:59 |
| Message-ID: | 87d0rz65sk.fsf@jsievers.enova.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 07:31:57AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>
>> I have seen people use savepoints in PostgreSQL to emulate Oracle's
>> "statement rollback" behavior: If a statement fails, only the statement
>> is undone, but the transaction continues.
>>
>> If you insert a savepoint before *every* statement in a transaction,
>> you can get a similar behavior in PostgreSQL, but the performance will
>> suck.
>
> The Postgres ODBC driver actually does that, and I have seen
> applications actually ready to pay the cost of extra round trips to the
> server to be able to get this property, even if that costs performance.
> You can issue a query through the driver and rollback at will this way
> to the previous state of the transaction.
Yep and it's fun watching the txid counter go up so fast too!
> --
> Michael
>
--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres(dot)consulting(at)comcast(dot)net
p: 312.241.7800
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tony Shelver | 2018-10-24 12:10:07 | Time-based table design / index selection |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-10-24 09:21:11 | Re: Should pg 11 use a lot more memory building an spgist index? |