Re: Shouldn't "aborted transaction" be an ERROR? (was Re:

I have just tested this on the latest code using the following

    Connection con = JDBC2Tests.openDB();
		try
		{

      // transaction mode
      con.setAutoCommit(false);
      Statement stmt = con.createStatement();
      stmt.execute("select 1/0");
			fail( "Should not execute this, as a SQLException s/b thrown" );
      con.commit();
		}
		catch ( Exception ex )
		{
		}
    try
    {
      con.commit();
      con.close();
    }catch ( Exception ex) {}
  }

and it executes as expected. It throws the SQLException and  does not
execute the fail statement

Thanks,

Dave

On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 12:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> John Taylor  writes:
> > On Wednesday 12 June 2002 16:36, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Queries after the failure aren't run at all; they're only passed through
> >> the parser's grammar so it can look for a COMMIT or ROLLBACK command.
> >> Normal processing resumes after ROLLBACK.  If you were paying attention
> >> to the return codes you'd notice complaints like
> >> 
> >> regression=# begin;
> >> BEGIN
> >> regression=# select 1/0;
> >> ERROR:  floating point exception! The last floating point operation either exceeded legal ranges or was a divide by zero
> >> -- subsequent queries will be rejected like so:
> >> regression=# select 1/0;
> >> WARNING:  current transaction is aborted, queries ignored until end of transaction block
> >> *ABORT STATE*
> 
> > Well, I'm using JDBC, and it isn't throwing any exceptions, so I
> > assumed it was working :-/ 
> 
> This brings up a point that's bothered me in the past.  Why is the
> "queries ignored" response treated as a NOTICE and not an ERROR?
> A client that is not paying close attention to the command result code
> (as JDBC is evidently not doing :-() might think that its command had
> been executed.
> 
> It seems to me the right behavior is
> 
> regression=# select 1/0;
> ERROR:  current transaction is aborted, queries ignored until end of transaction block
> regression=# 
> 
> I think the reason why it's been done with a NOTICE is that if we
> elog(ERROR) on the first command of a query string, we'll not be able to
> process a ROLLBACK appearing later in the same string --- but that
> behavior does not seem nearly as helpful as throwing an error.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
> 
>