Re: in failed sql transaction
| От | Gurjeet Singh |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: in failed sql transaction |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 65937bea0609250246p109ce574j79d0c883b54a170f@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: in failed sql transaction (Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: in failed sql transaction
Re: in failed sql transaction |
| Список | pgsql-general |
I too have been bothered about this behaviour in the past.
This is quite a desirable feature...
--
gurjeet@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | yahoo }.com
On 9/25/06, Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> wrote:
Correct.
Oracle, for one, behaves that way... Yes, COMMIT does succeed even if some statement(s) threw errors.
Probably, the 'other' DBs have implemented that by an implicit savepoint just before a command, and rollong back to it automatically, if the transaction fails.Transactions are all-or-nothing: all statements must succeed or the
Correct.
> All other databases I used up to now just ignore the statement violating the
> constraint, but leave the transaction intact.
Which databases behave that way? Does COMMIT succeed even if some
statements failed?
Oracle, for one, behaves that way... Yes, COMMIT does succeed even if some statement(s) threw errors.
This is intended behavior. You can use savepoints to roll back
part of a transaction so the transaction can continue after an
error.
This is quite a desirable feature...
--
gurjeet@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | yahoo }.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: