Are PostgreSQL functions transactional?

PostgresqlTransactions

Postgresql Problem Overview


Is a PostgreSQL function such as the following automatically transactional?

CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION refresh_materialized_view(name)
  RETURNS integer AS
$BODY$
 DECLARE
     _table_name ALIAS FOR $1;
     _entry materialized_views%ROWTYPE;
     _result INT;
 BEGIN          

     EXECUTE 'TRUNCATE TABLE ' || _table_name;

     UPDATE materialized_views
     SET    last_refresh = CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
     WHERE  table_name = _table_name;

     RETURN 1;
END
$BODY$
  LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE SECURITY DEFINER;


In other words, if an error occurs during the execution of the function, will any changes be rolled back? If this isn't the default behavior, how can I make the function transactional?

Postgresql Solutions


Solution 1 - Postgresql

PostgreSQL 12 update: there is limited support for top-level PROCEDUREs that can do transaction control. You still cannot manage transactions in regular SQL-callable functions, so the below remains true except when using the new top-level procedures.


Functions are part of the transaction they're called from. Their effects are rolled back if the transaction rolls back. Their work commits if the transaction commits. Any BEGIN ... EXCEPT blocks within the function operate like (and under the hood use) savepoints like the SAVEPOINT and ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT SQL statements.

The function either succeeds in its entirety or fails in its entirety, barring BEGIN ... EXCEPT error handling. If an error is raised within the function and not handled, the transaction calling the function is aborted. Aborted transactions cannot commit, and if they try to commit the COMMIT is treated as ROLLBACK, same as for any other transaction in error. Observe:

regress=# BEGIN;
BEGIN
regress=# SELECT 1/0;
ERROR:  division by zero
regress=# COMMIT;
ROLLBACK

See how the transaction, which is in the error state due to the zero division, rolls back on COMMIT?

If you call a function without an explicit surounding transaction the rules are exactly the same as for any other Pg statement:

BEGIN;
SELECT refresh_materialized_view(name);
COMMIT;

(where COMMIT will fail if the SELECT raised an error).

PostgreSQL does not (yet) support autonomous transactions in functions, where the procedure/function could commit/rollback independently of the calling transaction. This can be simulated using a new session via dblink.

BUT, things that aren't transactional or are imperfectly transactional exist in PostgreSQL. If it has non-transactional behaviour in a normal BEGIN; do stuff; COMMIT; block, it has non-transactional behaviour in a function too. For example, nextval and setval, TRUNCATE, etc.

Solution 2 - Postgresql

As my knowledge of PostgreSQL is less deeper than Craig Ringer´s I will try to give a shorter answer: Yes.

If you execute a function that has an error in it, none of the steps will impact in the database.

Also, if you execute a query in PgAdmin the same happen.

For example, if you execute in a query:

update your_table yt set column1 = 10 where yt.id=20;

select anything_that_do_not_exists;

The update in the row, id = 20 of your_table will not be saved in the database.

UPDATE Sep - 2018

To clarify the concept I have made a little example with non-transactional function nextval.

First, let´s create a sequence:

create sequence test_sequence start 100;

Then, let´s execute:

update your_table yt set column1 = 10 where yt.id=20; select nextval('test_sequence'); select anything_that_do_not_exists;

Now, if we open another query and execute

select nextval('test_sequence');

We will get 101 because the first value (100) was used in the latter query (that is because the sequences are not transactional) although the update was not committed.

Solution 3 - Postgresql

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql-structure.html

> It is important not to confuse the use of BEGIN/END for grouping statements in PL/pgSQL with the similarly-named SQL commands for transaction control. PL/pgSQL's BEGIN/END are only for grouping; they do not start or end a transaction. Functions and trigger procedures are always executed within a transaction established by an outer query — they cannot start or commit that transaction, since there would be no context for them to execute in. However, a block containing an EXCEPTION clause effectively forms a subtransaction that can be rolled back without affecting the outer transaction. For more about that see Section 39.6.6.

Solution 4 - Postgresql

In the function level, it is not transnational. In other words, each statement in the function belongs to a single transaction, which is the default db auto commit value. Auto commit is true by default. But anyway, you have to call the function using

select schemaName.functionName()

The above statement 'select schemaName.functionName()' is a single transaction, let's name the transaction T1, and so the all the statements in the function belong to the transaction T1. In this way, the function is in a single transaction.

Solution 5 - Postgresql

Additionally, the ATOMIC Transaction including triggers as well.

Attributions

All content for this solution is sourced from the original question on Stackoverflow.

The content on this page is licensed under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license.

Content TypeOriginal AuthorOriginal Content on Stackoverflow
QuestionDónalView Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - PostgresqlCraig RingerView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - PostgresqlIgnacioView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - PostgresqlIvan StreletsView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - PostgresqlRobinView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 5 - PostgresqlJeb50View Answer on Stackoverflow