From: | Joshua Yanovski <joshua(dot)yanovski(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter van Hardenberg <pvh(at)pvh(dot)ca>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Defaulting psql to ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK=interactive |
Date: | 2017-03-15 17:44:09 |
Message-ID: | CABz-M-EvVKw9M29fo=6cOOaDaE1h37-vZpuHGUbBPpTsffy66A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Just chiming in: I rely heavily on the current default behavior
because it prevents large statements pasted into psql that cause
errors in transactions from partially running, and if it were changed
I would have caused production outages.
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> 2017-03-15 16:38 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Peter van Hardenberg <pvh(at)pvh(dot)ca> wrote:
>> > Ads and I were talking over breakfast about usability issues and he
>> > mentioned transaction cancellation during interactive sessions as a
>> > serious
>> > pain point.
>> >
>> > I suggest we update the default of ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK to interactive for
>> > 10.0.
>> >
>> > The last discussion I could find about this subject was in 2011 and
>> > while
>> > there was concern about setting the default to "on" (as this would
>> > tamper
>> > with the expected behaviour of scripts), I don't see any identification
>> > of a
>> > problem that would be caused by setting it to "interactive" by default.
>>
>> Well, then you'd get one behavior when you use psql interactively, and
>> another behavior when you use it from a script. And if you used a
>> client other than psql the behavior would be different from psql.
>> Plus, it's kinda surprising to have a client that, by default, is
>> sending secret commands to the server that you don't know about. And
>> it's a backward-incompatible change against previous releases. I
>> don't think any of that makes this the worst idea ever, but on balance
>> I still think it's better to just recommend to people that they
>> configure their .psqlrc with this setting if they want the behavior.
>>
>> In short, -1 from me.
>
>
> I agree with Robert. I prefer some doc, web page "after install steps".
>
> Pavel
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Robert Haas
>> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2017-03-15 17:48:07 | Re: Re: [GSOC 17] Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-03-15 17:40:03 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve isolation tests infrastructure. |