From: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
Cc: | veem v <veema0000(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Moving to Postgresql database |
Date: | 2024-01-16 17:04:43 |
Message-ID: | CAFCRh-9Es2Ahgzetyu-46guwyGwPjaJXHfGpF0AG4zt7KDBjfw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 5:07 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
wrote:
> On 1/16/24 00:06, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 5:17 AM veem v <veema0000(at)gmail(dot)com
> > <mailto:veema0000(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
> > Is any key design/architectural changes should the app development
> > team [...], should really aware about
> > Hi. One of the biggest pitfall of PostgreSQL, from the app-dev
> perspective,
> > is the fact any failed statement fails the whole transaction, with
> > ROLLBACK as the only recourse.
>
> "SAVEPOINT establishes a new savepoint within the current transaction.
>
I wish it was that easy.
I've been scared away from using them, after reading a few articles...
Also, that incurs extra round trips to the server, from the extra commands.
I really wish https://github.com/lzlabs/pg_statement_rollback was built-in.
Don't make it the default, for backward compatibility, but please let me
opt-in to it, w/o an extension.
https://buttondown.email/nelhage/archive/notes-on-some-postgresql-implementation-details/
https://postgres.ai/blog/20210831-postgresql-subtransactions-considered-harmful
https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/09/29/why-we-spent-the-last-month-eliminating-postgresql-subtransactions/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2024-01-16 17:10:01 | Re: Moving to Postgresql database |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2024-01-16 17:04:05 | Re: Postgres Database Service Interruption |