From: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
To: pgsql-sql@vankoperen.nl
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Making dirty reads possible?
Date: 06 Dec 2004 16:28:54 -0500
Message-ID: <878y8b15gp.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41B4986B.70201@vankoperen.nl>
References: <41B4986B.70201@vankoperen.nl>
pgsql-sql@vankoperen.nl writes:
> But not possible for real at the moment?
>
> So, summarising:
> - Nested transactions is not (yet) supported
> - READ UNCOMMITTED isolation level is not (yet) supported
> - the EXECUTE plpgsql construct does not circumvent the transaction
Well nested transactions are in 8.0 but I don't think they help you much.
I find I've been stymied using server-side functions for large batch jobs for
pretty much the same reason. I find it works better and it's more flexible to
write client-side programs in the language of my choice that connect to the
database and do the batch jobs.
They can output progress logs or keep information about their progress in some
shared space. They can also control the transaction more freely committing in
the middle of the job if it's safe.
--
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, pgsql-sql@vankoperen.nl
Subject: Re: Making dirty reads possible?
In-Reply-To: <878y8b15gp.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