Re: [HACKERS] Nested Transactions, Abort All

[Thomas Swan]

Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 23:36, Greg Stark wrote:
 

"Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
   

Why not rollback all or commit all?
I really really don't like subbegin and subcommit.  I get the feeling
they'll cause more problems we haven't foreseen yet, but I can't put my
finger on it.  
     

Well I've already pointed out one problem. It makes it impossible to write
generic code or reuse existing code and embed it within a transaction. Code
meant to be a nested transaction within a larger transaction becomes
non-interchangeable with code meant to be run on its own.
   

Would a rollback N / abort N where N is the number of levels to rollback
/ abort work?  

 

Only, if you know the number of levels you are deep in the transaction.  

"ROLLBACK n" and "ROLLBACK ALL" together would be good alternatives to 
unwind nested transaction.  Perhaps a function for 
pg_transaction_nested_level( ) or a pg_transaction_nested_level variable 
could help in this.

Again, these are just opinions.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
   (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])