Tom, > I think such an approach is doomed to hopeless unreliability. There is > no concept of an error that doesn't require a transaction abort in the > system now, and that doesn't seem to me like something that can be > successfully bolted on after the fact. Also, there's a lot of > bookkeeping (eg buffer pins) that has to be cleaned up regardless of the > exact nature of the error, and all those mechanisms are hung off > transactions.
There's no way we can do a transactionless load, then? I'm thinking of the load-into-new-partition which is a single pass/fail operation. Would ignoring individual row errors in for this case still cause these kinds of problems? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
