Let's take the following fictional scenerio:
BEGIN;
INSERT INTO table1 VALUES ('somestring');
INSERT INTO table1 VALUES ('anotherstring');
SELECT user_defined_function();
COMMIT;
In this case, user_defined_function() does a lot more table manipulation.
I don't want that to be done if any statement prior fails, but it seems as
if it's always done, regardless. It seems as if the second INSERT is not
executed if the first fails, but the function is always called.
If any one of the statements within the transaction (including the
function) fails the entire statement will need to rollback.
If you are running 8 you can use savepoints to only have certain
parts of the entire transaction rollback and then continue forward.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
So ... I'm a little fuzzy on this. Is there a doc that details this
behaviour?
TIA.
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.commandprompt.com
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL
begin:vcard
fn:Joshua Drake
n:Drake;Joshua
org:Command Prompt, Inc.
adr:;;PO Box 215 ;Cascade Locks;OR;97014;US
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Consultant
tel;work:503-667-4564
tel;fax:503-210-0334
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.commandprompt.com
version:2.1
end:vcard
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
