From: | Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)postgres(dot)rocks> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Haumacher, Bernhard" <haui(at)haumacher(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Error on failed COMMIT |
Date: | 2020-02-14 20:11:42 |
Message-ID: | CADK3HHJrJecqy4gCLOi3fuk9rd114rQmZvbP0KzHhm-dOLRj=Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 15:07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)postgres(dot)rocks> writes:
> > On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 14:37, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> I'm not trying to deny that you might find some other server behavior
> >> more convenient. You might. And, to Vik's original point, it might be
> >> more compliant with the spec, too. But since changing that would have
> >> a pretty big blast radius at this stage, I think it's worth trying to
> >> make things work as well as they can with the server behavior that we
> >> already have. And I don't really see anything preventing the driver
> >> from doing that technically. I don't understand the idea that the
> >> driver is somehow not allowed to notice the command tag.
>
> > We have the same blast radius.
> > I have offered to make the behaviour requested dependent on a
> configuration
> > parameter but apparently this is not sufficient.
>
> Nope, that is absolutely not happening.
I should have been more specific.
I offered to make the behaviour in the JDBC driver dependent on a
configuration parameter
Dave Cramer
www.postgres.rocks
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-02-14 20:19:50 | Re: Error on failed COMMIT |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-02-14 20:07:33 | Re: Error on failed COMMIT |