Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP)

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

>
>
>
> 2014-04-07 11:59 GMT+02:00 Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>:
>
> On 07 April 2014 12:12, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> >+1 for feature
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> >-1 for Oracle syntax - it is hardly inconsistent with Postgres
>>
>> We can discuss and come out with the syntax based on everyone agreement.
>>
>> >Autonomous transactions should be used everywhere - not only in plpgsql
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes you are right. I am not planning to support only using plpgsql.
>> Initially we can support this
>>
>> Using the standalone SQL-commands and then later we can enhance based on
>> this infrastructure
>>
>> to be used using plpgsql, triggers.
>>
>
> ok
>
> long time I though about this feature.
>
> I am thinking so this should be fully isolated transaction - it should not
> be subtransaction, because then you can break database consistency - RI
>
>
>
I am missing something here, but how does making it a subtransaction break
consistency? Isnt that what should actually be happening so that the
autonomous transaction's changes are actually visible till the parent
transaction commits?

What am I missing here?

Regards,

Atri