Joe Conway wrote:
> Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> >I was just going thr. dblink code and noticed that dblink cursors are
> >wrapped in their own transaction.
>
> yup -- been that way since 7.3 was released.
>
> >If an application instantiates a transaction to do 10 things, one of
> >which is to fetch a cursor over dblink, how will it work?
>
> I guess it won't -- you're the first person who ever complained, so
> quite possibly you're the first who's needed it.
Won't dblink's attempt to initiate a transaction simply return with a
warning if a transaction is already in progress? This is what psql
does, and it's also what happens with Perl DBI, so it's only if dblink
freaks out that there will be a problem.
I wouldn't expect it to abort the entire (already running)
transaction upon receipt of a warning...
--
Kevin Brown kevin@sysexperts.com
