Re: Problem with aborting entire transactions on error

2012/12/10, David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com>:

> Please reply-to the list, not just myself.

Sorry.

> If it requires coding something to provide the user the desired flexibility
> then whether or not such flexibility is wise or unwise is going to go into
> said decision.

So?

> Also, since you are begging others to solve your own
> problems

Now, not just a problem of mine - but of many others as well, as I
wrote. And I was "begging" already: "please, read carefully" (I meant:
with understanding).

> you are in many ways behaving as a child.

When someone doesn't design his/her clothes on his own, doesn't sew
boots, bake bread etc. - "behaves like a child"?

> Especially with an Open
> Source project like PostgreSQL adults are welcomed and encouraged to solve
> their own problems by altering the source code and, in the spirit of
> community, contributing it back to the project (contribution also means you
> do not have to maintain your own custom version of the software).

If I knew the "innards" of Postgres as good, as its present developers
- maybe I could alter the code. But since I don't know them - I'm
perfectly sure, that the ones, who created the code, are able to
introduce such improvement during about 1/20 of the time, I had to
spend trying to do it by myself.

> Please do not take this as a personal affront;

Yes, I took this as personal affront, because IT IS a personal
affront. Do you really think, that your "please, do not take" is
changing this?

> It is easy to complain but apparently no one feels strongly enough to
> either code a solution themselves or sponsor someone else to do so.

From what I see, the development is going on - then my conclusion is,
that there are people "feeling strong enough" - and therefore I wanted
to let them know, where they got wrong.

> As I have not
> seen any core coders respond I cannot be certain whether there are
> underlying technical issues preventing this but there is at the least a
> resource allocation concern since neither code donors nor those sponsored
> by clients have made the time to implement this "simple feature". It may be
> more productive, not being a core coder yourself, to simply ask why such a
> feature has not been implemented given the apparent demand instead of
> asserting (from ignorance) that such an implementation should be very
> simple
> to accomplish. The later approach (as well as your response to me -
> personally) is much more confrontational and contrary (the direct reply at
> least) to the posted etiquette for this community.

No idea, what made you so upset with this "direct response" - just
clicked "Reply", and forgot to check the recipient's address.
Actually, the sender address should be pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
already.

I've got a feeling, that all you have to say, is: "if this is the way
it is, it means, that this is good, and shouldn't be changed". You are
unable to explain, why - just the "common belief" etc. is your
rationale (while it's not that "common" at all, as I wrote). You have
no arguments against, but: "code it by yourself", "it must be perfect,
when it works so", and so on.

According to you the development can be stopped at this time, since
everything is perfect.
--
regards,
Zbigniew