Thread: rollback vs. commit for closing read-only transaction
If an application transaction is known to be read-only, is there any reason to prefer COMMIT or ROLLBACK for closing that transaction? Would there be any performance difference between the two commands?
- DAP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Parker Tazz Networks (401) 709-5130
David Parker wrote: > If an application transaction is known to be read-only, is there any > reason to prefer COMMIT or ROLLBACK for closing that transaction? Would > there be any performance difference between the two commands? Doesn't matter. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Probably, turning fsync off would be helpful, since you know it is read-only. > -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general- > owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian > Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 3:01 PM > To: David Parker > Cc: postgres general > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] rollback vs. commit for closing read-only > transaction > > David Parker wrote: > > If an application transaction is known to be read-only, is there any > > reason to prefer COMMIT or ROLLBACK for closing that transaction? Would > > there be any performance difference between the two commands? > > Doesn't matter. > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road > + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania > 19073 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes:
> Probably, turning fsync off would be helpful, since you know it is
> read-only.
Wouldn't make any difference: a transaction that hasn't modified the
database doesn't bother to write any commit/abort WAL record at all.
regards, tom lane
For portability's sake commit successful transactions and rollback those that fail. Rick pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 04/25/2005 05:53:11 PM: > "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes: > > Probably, turning fsync off would be helpful, since you know it is > > read-only. > > Wouldn't make any difference: a transaction that hasn't modified the > database doesn't bother to write any commit/abort WAL record at all. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly