Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David G. Johnston
Тема Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions
Дата
Msg-id CAKFQuwaW22DROpEcocJ74tyxe8BxTA+Kd1G-MM6Q1qA6rnssgw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions  (Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions  (Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-general
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com> wrote:
>
As far as I'm aware neither PostgreSQL nor OS version do matter for this

Yes as of this date. However, that is not to say that the SQL standard (or PostgreSQL) may change
in the _future_, such that there "may" be a "ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT OR CONTINUE" after a failure,
in which case, someone else may be confused because there is no reference to the actual PostgreSQL version.
That is why it is important to include the version "AT THE TIME OF POSTING" so that future op's will
have a point of reference for the answer.


So preface your answers with: "as of 10.0 this is what I understand"

The timestamp on the email is likely more than sufficient for someone to lookup the PostgreSQL version should the need arise.

I'm not saying the presence of a version is bad, only the badgering of people asking questions to provide it when it has no bearing on the answer to the question being asked at the time it is asked.  You are more than welcome to meets the needs of future readers by anchoring every response you choose to make to the version or version you know your answers apply to.

David J.

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Melvin Davidson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions
Следующее
От: Melvin Davidson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions