Re: Disable Transaction - plans ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Disable Transaction - plans ?
Date
Msg-id 200110250441.f9P4fa022126@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Disable Transaction - plans ?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
> > Mike Mascari <mascarm@mascari.com> writes:
> > > In fact, some could argue that the default behavior of PostgreSQL
> > > should be changed (or at least have an option) to behave like
> > > Oracle, where a transaction is implicitly begun at the first
> > > encounter of an INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE - or in PostgreSQL's case, the
> > > first submitted statement.
> >
> > If we put in an implicit BEGIN at the start of a connection, when
> > does it get committed?  We certainly dare not do an implicit COMMIT
> > when the client disconnects, but without that the change would
> > completely break a lot of existing applications.
> >
> > Personally I'm perfectly happy with the notion that clients who want
> > this behavior can send a BEGIN for themselves ...
>
> In Ingres, you typically do 'SET AUTOCOMMIT ON' and it says that way for
> the rest of the session.  GUC would have a default setting for
> AUTOCOMMIT too.
>
> There is no plan to change the default, just to allow people to modify
> the default.

Sorry meant SET AUTOCOMMIT OFF.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin J. Drewiske"
Date:
Subject: Re: Using PostgreSQL and Access?
Next
From: BELLON Michel
Date:
Subject: Re: Importing Access 97 Database into 7.1.3