From: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
To: Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PL/SQL Function: self-contained transaction?
Date: 22 Aug 2005 14:20:00 -0400
Message-ID: <8764txj0kv.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050822141357.B1002@ganymede.hub.org>
References: <20050822141357.B1002@ganymede.hub.org>
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> 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?
The whole outer query issued from your frontend is in one transaction.
> If the whole function (and all QUERYs inside of it) are considered one
> transaction, can you do a begin/end within the function itself to 'force'
> commit on a specific part of the function?
Functions cannot issue start or end transactions. They're a creature of the
transaction you're in when you call them. Otherwise it wouldn't make sense to
be able to call them from within a query.
There is some discussion of "stored procedures" which would live outside of
transactions and be able to create transactions, commit, and roll them back.
But I don't think any of that work is committed yet. I'm not even sure it's
been written yet.
--
greg
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: gsstark@mit.edu, scrappy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PL/SQL Function: self-contained transaction?
In-Reply-To: <8764txj0kv.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
* 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