From: Gianni Ciolli <gianni.ciolli@2ndquadrant.it>
To: Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Autonomous subtransactions
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 23:59:47 +0000
Message-ID: <20120104235947.GA14382@leggeri.gi.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <61C12A8A-855E-45FA-AF39-46BA3EB5E08A@nasby.net>
References: <20111218082812.GA14355@leggeri.gi.lan>
<5B513EFD-7819-4600-BC09-39130CBBFBD0@nasby.net>
<CA+U5nM+tmRx2oodh=C86WwXWtV_WXb1bPi-bWFd-pH3AkkoZxA@mail.gmail.com>
<61C12A8A-855E-45FA-AF39-46BA3EB5E08A@nasby.net>
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 04:58:08PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> Except AFAIR Oracle uses the term to indicate something that is
> happening *outside* of your current transaction, which is definitely
> not what the proposal is talking about.
That feature is commonly translated in PostgreSQL to a dblink-based
solution, which itself is not distant from the current proposal, at
least in terms of inside/outside (the biggest difference I can see is
on sharing temporary tables).
But I am not sure I understand your remark; it would be clearer to me
if you could provide an example explaining the difference.
Dr. Gianni Ciolli - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gianni.ciolli@2ndquadrant.it | www.2ndquadrant.it
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: gianni.ciolli@2ndquadrant.it, jim@nasby.net, simon@2ndquadrant.com
Subject: Re: Autonomous subtransactions
In-Reply-To: <20120104235947.GA14382@leggeri.gi.lan>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox