| From: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gianni Ciolli <gianni(dot)ciolli(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Autonomous subtransactions |
| Date: | 2011-12-19 19:32:06 |
| Message-ID: | CABRT9RC4kzL+qBwbNCBFtWPUyzMZHQ=xjs0pE2pcPoG7Xsx4RA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 20:34, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> It's not clear to me why you think there would be a limitation to
> exactly 2 autonomous transactions.
Sorry my bad, I didn't read the proposal carefully. Nesting does
indeed allow multiple autonomous subtransactions.
Maybe that's just my paranoia, but the fact that subtransactions
aren't named means it's pretty easy to accidentally get "out of step"
and commit the wrong subtransaction. I see app developers often
messing up BEGIN/COMMIT/ROLLBACK already. This is why I like the
SAVEPOINT style; it's obvious when there's a bug.
(I do realize that allowing subtransactions to commit out of order
also makes it failure prone)
Regards,
Marti
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2011-12-19 19:33:31 | Re: Escaping ":" in .pgpass - code or docs bug? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-19 19:29:24 | Re: Page Checksums |