Re: Error on failed COMMIT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dave Cramer
Subject Re: Error on failed COMMIT
Date
Msg-id CADK3HH+20CJ6TqWcbYnbi2_99CJNtzr_9ctV-dEsRePQaKGaeA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Error on failed COMMIT  (Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>)
Responses Re: Error on failed COMMIT  (Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 19:32, Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks> wrote:


On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 19:23, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 07:15:05PM -0400, Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:47, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>     Third, the idea that individual interfaces, e.g. JDBC, should throw an
>     error in this case while the server just changes the COMMIT return tag
>     to ROLLBACK is confusing.  People regularly test SQL commands in the
>     server before writing applications or while debugging, and a behavior
>     mismatch would cause confusion.
>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by this. The server would throw an error. 

I am saying it is not wise to have interfaces behaving differently than
the server, for the reasons stated above.

Agreed and this is why I think it is important for the server to be defining the behaviour instead of each interface deciding how to handle this situation.



So it appears this is currently languishing as unresolved and feature freeze is imminent. 

What has to be done to get a decision one way or another before feature freeze.

I have provided a patch that could be reviewed and at least be considered in the commitfest.

Perhaps someone can review the patch and I can do whatever it takes to get it presentable ?

Dave Cramer
www.postgres.rocks

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Atomic pgrename on Windows
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: materialization blocks hash join