Re: Nested transaction - I am a bank ?? - Mailing list pgsql-general

No. You can set a transaction type with an explicit start transaction
call before you call your function, but be aware that there are quirks
within the pl framework ( like lack of query snapshot being refreshed)
that might make things operate in a manner slightly different from
normal transaction operations.

Robert Treat

On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 13:20, Thapliyal, Deepak wrote:
> Can I use a "set transaction" type mechanism within a function?
>
> thx
> Deep
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:jd@commandprompt.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:17 AM
> To: Thapliyal, Deepak
> Cc: 'Richard Huxton'; Anton.Nikiforov@loteco.ru;
> pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Nested transaction - I am a bank ??
>
>
> Thapliyal, Deepak wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >Assume I have a bank app.. When customer withdraws $10 from his
> >accouint I have to do following
> >    --> update account_summary table [subtract $10 from his account]
> >    --> update account detail_table [with other transaction details]
> >
> >Requirement:
> >    either both transactions should succeed or both transactions should
> be
> >rolled back in case of failure.
> >
> >Question:
> >    if my first update succeeds and second fails (say due to space
> errors
> >.. I have inconsistancy ..
> >
> >
>
> Not if you run the queries as a single transaction.
>
>
> >Per the thread below stored procedures/functions cannot have commits. I
> >assume that means that they will be implicitly commited ??
> >
> >How do I approach this simple requirment using psql ?
> >
> >Thx
> >Deep
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
> >[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Richard Huxton
> >Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 4:32 AM
> >To: Anton.Nikiforov@loteco.ru
> >Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> >Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Parse error help needed...
> >
> >
> >On Tuesday 13 January 2004 12:01, Anton.Nikiforov@loteco.ru wrote:
> >
> >
> >>RH> Remove the "commit" line - functions cannot define their own
> >>transactions RH> anyway.
> >>Do you know if it will be solved sometime? Or this is architecture
> >>dependend problem? I mean that transactions are rulez and very helpful
> >>rulez when working with large databases.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Nested transactions are on the todo list, but I don't know when they
> >will
> >appear.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
> Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
> +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
> Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
>     (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)

--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL