Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 20:53 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > > > Agreed. I think Pavel Stehule was doing some experiments with them, I > > > don't know if he got anywhere. > > > > > > > I did only first research. Any hack is possible - you can stack > > current transaction, but real implementation needs similar work like > > nested transaction :( and it is too low level for me. And some code > > cleaning is necessary. There are global variables. > > > > And there is most important question about data visibility - is > > autonomous transaction independent on main transaction (isolation)? > > You have to thing about deadlock, about reference integrity, etc. This > > task isn't simple. > > Yes, I think autonomous transactions should be on the TODO. They're > useful for > - error logging > - auditing > - creating new partitions automatically > > Plus I think we'd be able to improve the code for CREATE INDEX under > HOT, and probably a few other wrinkly bits of code.
Added to TODO: * Add anonymous transactions http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00893.php -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
