Re: Persistent changes in rolled-back transactions
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Persistent changes in rolled-back transactions |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwYScf5K8TJ80C4iohDPdyKrjDNbPqwHTNn-xu=kgUtjWQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Persistent changes in rolled-back transactions (Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Persistent changes in rolled-back transactions
Re: Persistent changes in rolled-back transactions |
| Список | pgsql-admin |
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 6:19 PM Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com> wrote:
Why do you say truncate is non-transactional? Something simple proves that it's not?
Or just read the documentation for the current version (I seem to recall it used to be non-transactional, maybe...doesn't matter now).
Sequences really shouldn't have been a surprise given the great lengths we go to document their gap-ful nature and this property.
Most anything a typical user is going to do within a SQL transaction is going to either be transactional or it will be disallowed to execute said command within a transaction.
David J.
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: