On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 12:10 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 1/16/24 09:04, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 5:07 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> On 1/16/24 00:06, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 5:17 AM veem v <veema0000@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:veema0000@xxxxxxxxx>
> > <mailto:veema0000@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:veema0000@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
> > Is any key design/architectural changes should the app
> development
> > team [...], should really aware about
> > Hi. One of the biggest pitfall of PostgreSQL, from the app-dev
> perspective,
> > is the fact any failed statement fails the whole transaction, with
> > ROLLBACK as the only recourse.
>
> "SAVEPOINT establishes a new savepoint within the current transaction.
>
>
> I wish it was that easy.
> I've been scared away from using them, after reading a few articles...
> Also, that incurs extra round trips to the server, from the extra commands.
The point was that '... with ROLLBACK as the only recourse.' is not the
case. There is an alternative, whether you want to use it being a
separate question.
Performance-killing alternatives are not really altternatives.
