TRANSACTIONS
От | Jose Soares |
---|---|
Тема | TRANSACTIONS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 38B27760.DB921B57@sferacarta.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
RE: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS
Re: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS Re: [GENERAL] TRANSACTIONS |
Список | pgsql-general |
Hi all, The transactions should be the way to distinguish a relational database from others no-relational databases, (MySQL is the right example). We are very proud of PostgreSQL transactions but seems that it doesn't work in the right way. It shoud be important to be sure that PostgreSQL is compliant with SQL92. I need absolutely to use transactions but until now I could not use it, in my case it is completely unusable. I tried transactions in other databases and I compared it with PostgreSQL and no one of which I tried has the same PostgreSQL behavior. I tried the following script: ------------------------------------------------------- PostgreSQL: ------------------------------------------------------- begin transaction; create table tmp(a int); insert into tmp values (1); insert into tmp values (1000000000000000000000000000000000); ERROR: pg_atoi: error reading "1000000000000000000000000000000000": Numerical result out of range commit; select * from tmp; ERROR: tmp: Table does not exist. ------------------------------------------------------- Interbase, Oracle,Informix,Solid,Ms-Access,DB2: ------------------------------------------------------- connect hygea.gdb; create table temp(a int); insert into temp values (1); insert into temp values (1000000000000000000000000000000000); commit; select * from temp; arithmetic exception, numeric overflow, or string truncation A =========== 1 I would like to know what the Standard says and who is in the rigth path PostgreSQL or the others, considering the two examples reported below. Comments? -- Jose' Soares Bologna, Italy Jose@sferacarta.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: