Did anything come of this discussion on whether SET initiates a
transaction or not?
In summary what is the right way to deal with setting autocommit in clients?
thanks,
--Barry
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Patch for handling "autocommit=false" in postgresql.conf
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 10:26:14 -0400
From: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: snpe <[email protected]>
CC: pgsql-jdbc <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
snpe <[email protected]> writes:> + // handle autocommit=false in postgresql.conf> + if
(haveMinimumServerVersion("7.3")){> + ExecSQL("set autocommit to on; commit;");> +
}
The above will fill people's logs withWARNING: COMMIT: no transaction in progress
if they don't have autocommit off.
Usebegin; set autocommit to on; commit;
instead.
I would recommend holding off on this patch altogether, actually,
until we decide whether SET will be a transaction-initiating
command or not. I would still like to persuade the hackers community
that it should not be.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
