From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: peter.garner@toward.com
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] aborted transactions
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 20:22:09 -0500
Message-ID: <6873.909364929@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <199810251234.AA50923204@piglet.toward.com>
"Peter Garner" <peter.garner@toward.com> writes:
> However, it seems to me that if certain
> queries fail, the current transaction is aborted and all
> queries are ignored until the transaction is ended, either
> via commit or rollback.
*Any* backend-detected "fatal" error causes the transaction to
be aborted. I've kinda wished that transactions (atomic update)
could be separated from error-abort also, but right now the two
always go together in Postgres.
> Also if there is no begin
> transaction block, I assume that each statement is a unit
> of work and that all subsequent queries will work.
Right: a statement appearing outside any begin-transaction block
is treated as a self-contained transaction.
regards, tom lane
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-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, peter.garner@toward.com
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] aborted transactions
In-Reply-To: <6873.909364929@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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