Re: COMMIT in PostgreSQL
От | Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder |
---|---|
Тема | Re: COMMIT in PostgreSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1027090843.8993.34.camel@atlas обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: COMMIT in PostgreSQL (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: COMMIT in PostgreSQL
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2002-07-19 at 15:48, Tom Lane wrote: > Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes: > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2002 at 03:03:02PM +0300, stefan@extum.com wrote: > >> thanks a lot all for comments. So in PostgreSQL each query is a > >> transaction ? > > > If you want them that way. If you want to combine them into one transaction, > > you use BEGIN. > > Right; otherwise you get the sort of behavior that some other databases > call auto-commit. > > While we can't change this without breaking huge amounts of client code, > there has been talk of offering a parameter setting that could be > changed to support the SQL-standard behavior (which could be thought of > as auto-BEGIN in Postgres terms: any statement implicitly causes a > BEGIN, and then you stay in that transaction until you explicitly say > COMMIT). How much client code would break if pg would start-up in 'autocommit', and revert to standard SQL after receiving the first 'COMMIT'? (Supposing - I don't know that - that standard SQL but an implicit BEGIN at statements issued after a COMMIT). Benefits: adapting SQL code that excepts standard behaviour would be easy to fix by just requiring to enter a BEGIN upon opening the connection. Just a thought. cheers -- vbi -- secure email with gpg http://fortytwo.ch/gpg
Вложения
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: