Re: Question regarding how databases support atomicity

From: Siddharth Jain <siddhsql(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question regarding how databases support atomicity
Date: 2024-05-04 03:02:49
Message-ID: CAPqV3pQquw63Fv_fCJzAAnUWk86qHfg1cH=+mJ2N=4LGdDyrNw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 8:00 PM Siddharth Jain <siddhsql(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> I am trying to sharpen my understanding of databases. Let's say there is
> an operation foo as part of the public API that internally translates to
> more than 1 operation - I am sure there are examples like this in postgres.
> So to do foo we have to do following in order in all or none fashion:
>
> 1. Step 1
> 2. Step 2
> 3. Step 3
>
> The way I understand this is that if there is a failure in-between, we
> start undoing and reverting the previous operations one by one. But what if
> there is a failure and we are not able to revert an operation. How is that
> situation handled? e.g., something failed when we tried to do Step 3. now
> we revert Step 2 and succeed. but when we try to revert step 1 we fail.
> what happens now? To me, it seems its impossible to guarantee true
> atomicity in general.
>
> S.
>

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2024-05-04 03:10:31 Re: Question regarding how databases support atomicity
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-05-04 02:44:23 Re: How to Build Postgres in a Portable / Relocatable fashion?