X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51B4D1B537 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:45:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 69117-10 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:45:06 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.hive.nj2.inquent.com (mc.carriermail.com [205.178.180.9]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8560DD1B4F9 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:45:04 -0400 (AST) Received: (qmail 1415 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2003 19:45:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.2.5?) (216.208.117.7) by 205.178.180.9 with SMTP; 10 Nov 2003 19:45:04 -0000 Subject: Re: transaction processing after error in statement From: Rod Taylor To: Rajesh Kumar Mallah Cc: Holger Jakobs , sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <3FB1366E.9030805@trade-india.com> References: <200311101237.hAACbuJ12784@bg.bib.de> <1068490585.25089.7.camel@jester> <3FB1366E.9030805@trade-india.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1068493505.25089.48.camel@jester> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:45:05 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200311/98 X-Sequence-Number: 15913 > Although i am not aware of the roots of this discussion but would like > to > comment at this point . > > When we work with sequences an aborted transaction does have > a permanent effect on the last value of sequence. Is this behaviour > not a violation of above defination of transaction ? I believe you are correct, which is probably why Oracle offers serialized sequences for those who want them to be. Sequences have been explicitly documented as functioning the way they do as a concession for performance.