Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > It's undeniable that auto-retry would be better from a user's > perspective than a user-visible cancel. So if it's *reasonable* > to implement, I think we should be working on it. I'm also very > puzzled as to why nobody else wants to even discuss it; it's like > some wierd blackout. Well, at least for serializable transactions past the first statement, you'd need to have the complete *logic* for the transaction in order to do a retry. Not that this is a bad idea -- our application framework does this automatically -- but unless you only support this for a transaction which is wrapped up as a function, I don't see how the database itself could handle it. It might be *possible* to do it outside of a single-function transaction in a read committed transaction, but you'd have to be careful about locks. I remember suggesting automatic query retry (rather than continuing in a mixed-snapshot mode) for update conflicts in read committed mode and Tom had objections; you might want to check the archives for that. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
