X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F433D7226 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:13:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 89246-01 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:13:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3E3D7216 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:13:48 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [194.25.154.138] (helo=webserv.wug.de) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0MKwtQ-1E7Gns1ogU-0000RF; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 20:13:48 +0200 Received: from kretschmer by webserv.wug.de with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1E7GpA-0003mA-00 for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 20:15:08 +0200 Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 20:15:08 +0200 From: "A. Kretschmer" To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PL/SQL Function: self-contained transaction? Message-ID: <20050822181508.GA14469@webserv.wug-glas.de> Mail-Followup-To: "A. Kretschmer" , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org References: <20050822141357.B1002@ganymede.hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050822141357.B1002@ganymede.hub.org> X-DEST: 208 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Message-Flag: Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds) X-OS: Linux - weil ich es mir Wert bin! X-Info: registrierter Linux-User 97922 http://counter.li.org User-Agent: mutt-ng 1.5.9i (Linux) X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:51ea9561fc3f6d9539a2acd743e4748c X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.295 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.028, MISSING_MIMEOLE=0, X_MSMAIL_PRIORITY_HIGH=0.267] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200508/189 X-Sequence-Number: 22417 am 22.08.2005, um 14:16:30 -0300 mailte Marc G. Fournier folgendes: > > In PostgreSQL, as everyone knows, a QUERY == a transaction, unless wrap'd > in a BEGIN/END explicitly ... how does that work with a function? is there > an implicit BEGIN/END around the whole transaction, or each QUERY within > the function itself? > > If the whole function (and all QUERYs inside of it) are considered one > transaction, Yes, exactly. Regards, Andreas -- Andreas Kretschmer (Kontakt: siehe Header) Heynitz: 035242/47212, D1: 0160/7141639 GnuPG-ID 0x3FFF606C http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net === Schollglas Unternehmensgruppe ===