Matt,
> Seriously, though, I'm willing to devote considerable time to this.
> Rewriting all my Oracle code function-by-function could be painful, and
> I would end up dragging other people around this company into it. I'm
> still trying to hold on to my fantasy that I can hack Postgres (and
> con
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The EnterpriseDB guys have a final product now, and it's designed to
> emulate Oracle as much as possible.
The question at hand is whether "as much as possible" includes having
reinvented plpgsql's execution engine ... I have not seen their pr
I looked at EnterpriseDB a few months ago. The installation errored.
It left stuff in /var/opt, which I consider non-standard for a Red Hat
machine. The whole product just didn't feel clean to me. I admit
that's a pretty limited and subjective evaluation, especially for a beta
product, but I wa
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 02:34:50PM +, Matt Miller wrote:
> > > Rewriting all my Oracle code function-by-function could be painful
> > > ...
> > > I'm still trying to hold on to my fantasy that I can hack Postgres (and
> > > contrib/ora2pg) into submission.
> >
> > Why don't you just use Enterp
> > Rewriting all my Oracle code function-by-function could be painful
> > ...
> > I'm still trying to hold on to my fantasy that I can hack Postgres (and
> > contrib/ora2pg) into submission.
>
> Why don't you just use EnterpriseDB?
I looked at EnterpriseDB a few months ago. The installation err
Title: RE: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT
>if I could get into the TRY section of the PG_CATCH()/PG_TRY()
> construct without an intervening elog(ERROR) then I'd have a
> chance ...
Sorry, I meant "the CATCH section of the PG_TRY()/PG_CATCH()
construct."
Title: RE: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT
> In general I don't think it even makes sense to think of making
> executor rollback non-transactional.
Agreed.
I would not want to rollback some statements and not others within a
transaction. I would like a complete rollback to happen, but onl
Why don't you just use EnterpriseDB?
Chris
That would defeat my goal of not rewriting all my Oracle code.
If I were fool enough to plan an attack on the main executor's exception
handling to try and disarm it of its subtransaction semantics, where
would I start? Where would I end? What would
Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I were fool enough to plan an attack on the main executor's exception
> handling to try and disarm it of its subtransaction semantics, where
> would I start? Where would I end? What would I do in between? Can New
> Orleans be rebuilt above sea level?
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 18:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Basically I'd like my Pl/pgSQL code to be able to utilize the try/catch
> > paradigm of error handling without the overhead of subtransactions
>
> [Pl/pgSQL] can't even do 2+2 without
> calling the ma
[ redirected to -hackers, where it's actually on topic ]
Matt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [redirected from -patches]
> On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 16:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This fundamentally breaks the entire backend. You do not have the
>> option to continue processing after elog(ERROR
11 matches
Mail list logo
