| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All |
| Date: | 2004-07-09 16:14:12 |
| Message-ID: | 200407091614.i69GEEU27139@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >
> > An 'END SUB' after a 'BEGIN SUB' in plpgsql could be required, and could
> > mean start/end block and subtx. I do not really see a downside.
> > But, it would imho only make sense if the 'END SUB' would commit sub
> > or abort sub iff subtx is in aborted state (see my prev posting)
> >
> > Andreas
> >
> Hello,
>
> is good idea use keywords "begin sub" and "end sub"? Programmers like me
> will be an problems with reading and writing SP, because begin sub and
> mostly end sub are keywords from visual basic with different sense.
> BEGIN SUBTRANSACTION and END SUBTRANSACTION is longer but more readable
I think we agreed on BEGIN NESTED/COMMIT NESTED, and START NESTED
TRANSACTION and COMMIT NESTED TRANSACTION.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2004-07-09 16:22:49 | Re: User Quota Implementation |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-07-09 16:09:38 | Re: User Quota Implementation |