On 06/18/2009 02:42 AM, Pavel Golub wrote:
Now to implement customer's desire in PostgreSQL there are two ways:
1. Each script must be executed in the separate connection context
2. Each script must be executed inside critical section, in other
words current scipt must block others until COMMIT
Pavel Golub writes:
> [ proposal involving ]
> SWITCH TRANSACTION first; -- switch context
> So, what do you think guys?
No chance :-(. The amount of work that would be required is *vastly*
out of proportion to any possible benefit. Use multiple connections.
regards, t
Hello.
You wrote:
TL> Pavel Golub writes:
>> Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
>> ever, like Firebird?
TL> What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
TL> regards, tom lane
Sorry guys, my bad. The thing is I'm not a Fire
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> According to the (hard to find) Firebird docs (or rather, the old
> Interbase docs, which is all they have):
> A single application can start simultaneous transactions. InterBase
> extends transaction
> management and data manipulation statements to support t
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> I have no idea what they are in Firebird but the name conjured up a
>> different (interesting) idea for me. I had the image of naming a
>> transaction and then being able to have other sessions join that same
>> transaction. We've discussed
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Yes, but some other followups suggest that maybe a "named
transaction" does something else entirely. Thus my request for a
definition of what the OP is actually asking for.
Well, a quick google search suggests that all three guesses here were
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
AFAIK that's an "autonomous transaction", at least to some other RDBMSs.
Right, but since I had to ask what that was recently I though I'd use a
bit more description :-)
Yes, but some other followups sug
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 14:38 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Yes, but some other followups suggest that maybe a "named
> > transaction" does something else entirely. Thus my request for a
> > definition of what the OP is actually asking for.
>
> Well, a quick google searc
Tom Lane wrote:
> Yes, but some other followups suggest that maybe a "named
> transaction" does something else entirely. Thus my request for a
> definition of what the OP is actually asking for.
Well, a quick google search suggests that all three guesses here were
off base. This is the best
Greg Stark wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Alvaro
> Herrera wrote:
> > AFAIK that's an "autonomous transaction", at least to some other RDBMSs.
>
> I have no idea what they are in Firebird but the name conjured up a
> different (interesting) idea for me. I had the image of naming a
> t
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Alvaro
> Herrera wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Lane wrote:
What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
>>>
>>> Isn't this just another name for a subtransaction or inner transact
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Alvaro
Herrera wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
>>
>> Isn't this just another name for a subtransaction or inner transaction
>> that can be separately committed?
>
> AFAIK that's an
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> AFAIK that's an "autonomous transaction", at least to some other RDBMSs.
> Right, but since I had to ask what that was recently I though I'd use a
> bit more description :-)
Yes, but some other followups suggest that maybe a "named transaction"
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
Isn't this just another name for a subtransaction or inner transaction
that can be separately committed?
AFAIK that's an "autonomous transaction",
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
>
> Isn't this just another name for a subtransaction or inner transaction
> that can be separately committed?
AFAIK that's an "autonomous transaction", at least to some other RDBMSs.
--
Al
Tom Lane wrote:
Pavel Golub writes:
Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
ever, like Firebird?
What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
Isn't this just another name for a subtransaction or inner transact
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2009, at 17:37, "David E. Wheeler" wrote:
>> On Jun 17, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Pavel Golub writes:
Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
ever, like Firebird?
>>> What in heck is a
Greg Stark wrote:
>> On Jun 17, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Pavel Golub writes:
Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named
transaction ever, like Firebird?
>>>
>>> What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
> I'm curious what they ate too
I'm curious what they ate too
--
Greg
On 17 Jun 2009, at 17:37, "David E. Wheeler"
wrote:
On Jun 17, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Pavel Golub writes:
Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
ever, like Firebird?
What in heck is a named transaction,
On Jun 17, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Pavel Golub writes:
Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
ever, like Firebird?
What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
That Tom Lane, so warm and cuddly!
David
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailin
Pavel Golub writes:
> Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
> ever, like Firebird?
What in heck is a named transaction, and why should we care?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make c
Hello, pgsql-hackers.
Is there any possibility that Postgres will have named transaction
ever, like Firebird?
Now for each transaction client should open separate connection. But
CONNECTION LIMIT option for database make this a little bit harder
--
With best wishes,
Pavel
22 matches
Mail list logo
