On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Bob Henkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you looked at creating a function in perl and creating a new
> connection? Or using a dblink query which can create a new connection?
> These two methods work. I have used them to insert to a log table regardless
> of the
No, in Oracle too SAVEPOINT and AUTONOMOUS transaction are different beasts.
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Bob Henkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Coming from an Oracle background my understanding is they're one in the
> same.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera <
> [EMAIL
Coming from an Oracle background my understanding is they're one in the
same.
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Bob Henkel escribió:
> > Have you looked at creating a function in perl and creating a new
> > connection? Or using a dblink query which can
Have you looked at creating a function in perl and creating a new
connection? Or using a dblink query which can create a new connection?
These two methods work. I have used them to insert to a log table regardless
of the parent transaction being commited or rolled back.
A old example I posted of u
Gurjeet Singh escribió:
> I have seen this feature being asked for, and this work-around suggested so
> many times. If plpgql does it internally, why not provide a clean interface
> for this? Is there some road-block, or that nobody has ever tried it?
Initially we aimed at just exposing SAVEPOINT
Bob Henkel escribió:
> Have you looked at creating a function in perl and creating a new
> connection? Or using a dblink query which can create a new connection?
> These two methods work. I have used them to insert to a log table regardless
> of the parent transaction being commited or rolled back.
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Reg Me Please escribió:
> > Il Thursday 02 October 2008 16:15:10 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
>
> > > You can nest blocks arbitrarily, giving you the chance to selectively
> > > rollback pieces of the function. It's only a b
Have you looked at creating a function in perl and creating a new
connection? Or using a dblink query which can create a new connection?
These two methods work. I have used them to insert to a log table regardless
of the parent transaction being commited or rolled back.
A old example I posted of u
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Reg Me Please escribió:
>> You mean I can issue a ROLLBACK command within a BEGIN...END; block to roll
>> it
>> back?
> No -- I mean you can use BEGIN/EXCEPTION/END blocks as you like, nesting
> them or putting one after another. Complementing this w
Il Thursday 02 October 2008 17:10:23 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
> Reg Me Please escribió:
> > Il Thursday 02 October 2008 16:15:10 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
> > > You can nest blocks arbitrarily, giving you the chance to selectively
> > > rollback pieces of the function. It's only a bit more awkw
Reg Me Please escribió:
> Il Thursday 02 October 2008 16:15:10 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
> > You can nest blocks arbitrarily, giving you the chance to selectively
> > rollback pieces of the function. It's only a bit more awkward.
>
> You mean I can issue a ROLLBACK command within a BEGIN...END;
Il Thursday 02 October 2008 16:15:10 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
> Reg Me Please escribió:
> > Well, if it is a limitation, and having it would lead to a "better
> > product", why not making it a feature for the next still-open release?
>
> Because no one is working on implementing it?
>
> > In my o
Reg Me Please escribió:
> Well, if it is a limitation, and having it would lead to a "better product",
> why not making it a feature for the next still-open release?
Because no one is working on implementing it?
> In my opinion that's more than a limitation, it's a missing feature.
> In your code
Richard Huxton wrote:
>> After a discussion on comp.databases.postgresql I realized that this
>> is actually a limitation.
>>
>> Consider the following:
>>
>> BEGIN
>>UPDATE ...
>>UPDATE ...
>>UPDATE ...
>> EXCEPTION
>>WHEN integrity_constraint_violation THEN
>> ...
>> END;
Hi.
My humble opinion follows.
One point here is that the decision for the ROLLBACK could possibly be
different from errors.
It could simply be based upon a generic expression, not just the conditions
seen in "Appendix A" of the manual.
An exception is something different from a transaction, de
Well, if it is a limitation, and having it would lead to a "better product",
why not making it a feature for the next still-open release?
In my opinion that's more than a limitation, it's a missing feature.
In your code you often need to create savepoints to delay the decision for the
commitment.
Albe Laurenz wrote:
> After a discussion on comp.databases.postgresql I realized that this
> is actually a limitation.
>
> Consider the following:
>
> BEGIN
>UPDATE ...
>UPDATE ...
>UPDATE ...
> EXCEPTION
>WHEN integrity_constraint_violation THEN
> ...
> END;
>
> If the fir
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Is there a way to have (sub)transactions within a function body?
> > > I'd like to execute some code (a transaction!) inside a function and later
> > > decide whether that transaction is to be committed or not.
> >
> > You could issue a "SAVEPOINT name". If at the end y
Dennis Brakhane escribió:
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi all.
> >
> > Is there a way to have (sub)transactions within a function body?
> > I'd like to execute some code (a transaction!) inside a function and later
> > decide whether that transactio
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Is there a way to have (sub)transactions within a function body?
> I'd like to execute some code (a transaction!) inside a function and later
> decide whether that transaction is to be committed or not.
You coul
Hi all.
Is there a way to have (sub)transactions within a function body?
I'd like to execute some code (a transaction!) inside a function and later
decide whether that transaction is to be committed or not.
Thanks.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make c
Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Hi all.
>
> Is there a way to have (sub)transactions within a function body?
No.
Andreas
--
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds)
"If I was
22 matches
Mail list logo
