Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbpaVxZiSRrRGo+6b3+KD37KUk3LC2_fgs0vH8OHz0cXw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions  (Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464@aol.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464@aol.com> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure about the terminology here, though, because the Transaction
> Tutorial (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/tutorial-transactions.html)
> speaks of "aborted" transactions, while you use the term "failed" here.

Purely from a user point of view, shouldn't "aborted" mean a ROLLBACK issues by the application
due to a violation of a business rule, whereas "failed" should mean as a ROLLBACK issues by
PG due to constraint violation or like disk full or whatever.

​I was using failed because I hadn't done sufficient research and wasn't aware of "aborted" being used in this context.  The error in psql itself says "current transaction is aborted ..."

There is no distinction as to why the statements failed and the transaction is in an aborted state as far as a transaction is concerned.​

David J.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Rakesh Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions
Next
From: "btober@computer.org"
Date:
Subject: Re: Alter view with dependence without drop view!