Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote:
>> On 08/07/2012 02:27 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> I did not commit the advanced.sgml changes.
>>
>> That's arguably the most important point to raise this. The most
>> recent question came from someone who actually bothered to RTFM
>> and believed based on the advanced-transactions page that
>> rollback rolls *everything* back.
>>
>> Some kind of hint that there are execptions is IMO very
>> important. I'm not sure what the best form for it to take is.
>
> I'm not sure, either. Maybe we should avoid blanket statements
> and just say something like:
>
> Note: Some operations on sequences are non-transactional and will
> not be rolled back on transaction abort. See <xref>.
I also think it's a problem that one can get through the entire
"Concurrency Control" chapter (mvcc.sgml) without a clue that
sequences aren't transactional. I think maybe a mention in the
Introduction section of that chapter with a <ref> would be
appropriate.
-Kevin