Re: JDBC behaviour
От | Sridhar N Bamandlapally |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JDBC behaviour |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGuFTBWODgA_-JLGWBHqg_2NUZWDiKZSUkNgFJj_CZ4gZcqjVQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: JDBC behaviour (John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: JDBC behaviour
Re: JDBC behaviour |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
The code/framework is written to handle batch inserts, which is common for all databases
I feel, PostgreSQL JDBC may need to modify setAutoCommit(false) code to "implicit savepoint - on error - rollback to savepoint"
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 3:59 PM, John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com> wrote:
if you want each insert to work indepedently yet stay with the transaction model, then each insert should be its own transaction...
conn.setAutoCommit(false);
executeUpdate("insert into employee(id,name) values(1, 'K1')"); conn.commit();
executeUpdate("insert into employee(id,name) values(1, 'K1')"); conn.commit();
executeUpdate("insert into employee(id,name) values(1, 'K2')"); conn.commit();
otherwise the way you wrote it, its a single transaction. all three inserts have to succeed, otherwise, all three are rolledback. why is that so hard to understand?
--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: