Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-11 Thread David Johnston
Sergey Shelukhin wrote > Due to presence of a large number of historical installations {doing such > and such} is not viable. Yeah, PostgreSQL faces this same issue If you intend to stay here long, and we hope you do (welcome by the way), it is customary to bottom-post on these lists. One ot

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-11 Thread Sergey Shelukhin
Folding to uppercase is according to standard, lowercase no, so in our case we could expect it to work if we have uppercase tables... in fact, it should work whether FS is case sensitive or not in MySQL, tables are created and used uppercase. Due to presence of a large number of historical installa

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-11 Thread Alban Hertroys
On 11 September 2013 07:53, Sergey Shelukhin wrote: > The query suffers from the auto-lower-casing of unquoted table names, > which is not ANSI compliant. Technically we could add quotes (and stay > ANSI), but then MySQL would break without explicitly setting it to use ANSI > mode, so it's a lose

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-10 Thread Sergey Shelukhin
The query suffers from the auto-lower-casing of unquoted table names, which is not ANSI compliant. Technically we could add quotes (and stay ANSI), but then MySQL would break without explicitly setting it to use ANSI mode, so it's a lose-lose situation if we do not want to have DB-specific code. So

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-10 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Sergey Shelukhin wrote: > Hi. > Is there any way to make postgres not abort the transaction on failed > select? > > I have a system that uses ORM to retrieve data; ORM is very slow for some > cases, so there's a perf optimization that issues ANSI SQL queries direct

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-10 Thread David Johnston
Sergey Shelukhin wrote > ORM in this case doesn't execute the failing statements, we do. And > obviously we want to avoid implementing another "better ORM" > w/database-specific code for this "side path" if possible, so we just > stick > to ANSI SQL (for now). > > As for the question itself, I bel

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-10 Thread Sergey Shelukhin
ORM in this case doesn't execute the failing statements, we do. And obviously we want to avoid implementing another "better ORM" w/database-specific code for this "side path" if possible, so we just stick to ANSI SQL (for now). As for the question itself, I believe the relevant standard (that is S

Re: [GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-10 Thread David Johnston
Sergey Shelukhin wrote > Hi. > Is there any way to make postgres not abort the transaction on failed > select? > > I have a system that uses ORM to retrieve data; ORM is very slow for some > cases, so there's a perf optimization that issues ANSI SQL queries > directly > thru ORM's built-in passthr

[GENERAL] not aborting transactions on failed select

2013-09-10 Thread Sergey Shelukhin
Hi. Is there any way to make postgres not abort the transaction on failed select? I have a system that uses ORM to retrieve data; ORM is very slow for some cases, so there's a perf optimization that issues ANSI SQL queries directly thru ORM's built-in passthru, and falls back to ORM if they fail.