Re: chained transactions

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-10-02T05:38:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 08:21:20PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Oh, is that all it does? That's disappointing, because that's a lot less
> powerful than how I understand chained transactions. And at the same time
> relieving, because that's a lot simpler to implement :-).
> 
> In Gray & Reuter's classic book, Transaction Processing, they describe
> chained transactions so that you also keep locks and cursors. Unfortunately
> I don't have a copy at hand, but that's my recollection, at least. I guess
> the SQL standard committee had a different idea.

The patch set does not apply anymore, so this patch is moved to next CF,
waiting on author.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Transaction chaining

  2. Turn transaction_isolation into GUC enum