Re: Vote on SET in aborted transaction

On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Michael Loftis wrote:

> Vote number 1 -- ROLL BACK

I agree..  Number 1 - ROLL BACK

>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >OK, would people please vote on how to handle SET in an aborted
> >transaction?  This vote will allow us to resolve the issue and move
> >forward if needed.
> >
> >In the case of:
> >
> >    SET x=1;
> >    BEGIN;
> >    SET x=2;
> >    query_that_aborts_transaction;
> >    SET x=3;
> >    COMMIT;
> >
> >at the end, should 'x' equal:
> >
> >    1 - All SETs are rolled back in aborted transaction
> >    2 - SETs are ignored after transaction abort
> >    3 - All SETs are honored in aborted transaction
> >    ? - Have SETs vary in behavior depending on variable
> >
> >Our current behavior is 2.
> >
> >Please vote and I will tally the results.
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>


Vince.
-- 
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH    email: vev@michvhf.com    http://www.pop4.net        56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo
atPop4 Networking       Online Campground Directory    http://www.camping-usa.com      Online Giftshop Superstore
http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================