On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Jim Nasby <j...@nasby.net> wrote: > On Dec 18, 2011, at 2:28 AM, Gianni Ciolli wrote: >> I have written some notes about autonomous subtransactions, which have >> already been touched (at least) in two separate threads; please find >> them at >> >> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Autonomous_subtransactions > > The document seems to mix the terms subtransaction and autonomous > transaction. That's going to generate a ton of confusion, because both terms > already have meaning associated with them: > > - Autonomous transaction means you can execute something outside of your > current transaction and it is in no way effected by the current transaction > (doesn't matter if T0 commits or not). > - Subtransactions are an alternative to savepoints. They allow you to break a > large transaction into smaller chunks, but if T0 doesn't commit then none of > the subtransactions do either.
OK, perhaps we should just stick to the term Autonomous Transaction. That term is in common use, even if the usage is otherwise exactly the same as a subtransaction i.e. main transaction stops until the subtransaction is complete. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
