Re: [JDBC] problem with new autocommit config parameter and jdbc
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [JDBC] problem with new autocommit config parameter and jdbc |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21616.1031687757@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [JDBC] problem with new autocommit config parameter and (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [JDBC] problem with new autocommit config parameter and
Re: [JDBC] problem with new autocommit config parameter and jdbc |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > That seems messy. What you are saying is that if autocommit is off, > then in: > SET x=1; > UPDATE ... > SET y=2; > ROLLBACK; > that the x=1 doesn't get rolled back bu the y=2 does? Yes, if you weren't in a transaction at the start. > I can't see any good logic for that. How about "the SQL spec requires it"? Date seems to think it does, at least for some variables (of course we have lots of variables that are not in the spec). I can't find anything very clear in the SQL92 or SQL99 documents, and I'm not at home at the moment to look at my copy of Date, but if Curt's reading is correct then we have spec precedent for acting this way. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: