Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Anyway should 'set autocommit to off;commit' cause
> > a warning or an error in the first place ?
>
> IIRC, the SET does *not* start a transaction,
Yes but doesn't autocommit-off mode mean that
it implicitly begins a transaction in suitable
places ? For example, 'set autocommit to off;
declare .. cursor ..' works though it never
work without BEGIN under autocommit-on mode.
> so the COMMIT should raise
> a warning.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
http://www.geocities.jp/inocchichichi/psqlodbc/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
- [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit off mode Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit off mo... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit of... D'Arcy J.M. Cain
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit of... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommi... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autoc... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under ... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior un... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavio... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavio... Hiroshi Inoue
- [HACKERS] autocommit off mo... Dave Cramer
- Re: [HACKERS] autocommit of... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] autocommit of... Dave Cramer
- Re: [HACKERS] autocommit of... Dave Cramer
- Re: [HACKERS] autocommit of... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit off mo... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit off mo... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] A bad behavior under autocommit off mo... Barry Lind
