Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error

From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
To: Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Date: 2006-05-10 08:10:16
Message-ID: 20060510081016.GA14476@svana.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:41:46AM +0200, Mario Weilguni wrote:
> > > Could we make BEGIN fail when we already are in a transaction?
> >
> > We could, but it'd probably break about as many apps as it fixed.
> > I wonder whether php shouldn't be complaining about this, instead
> > --- doesn't php have its own ideas about controlling where the
> > transaction commit points are?
>
> In fact it would break many application, so it should be at least controllable
> by a setting or GUC.

You want to make a GUC that makes:

BEGIN;
BEGIN;

Leave you with an aborted transaction? That seems like a singularly
useless feature...

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mario Weilguni 2006-05-10 08:14:22 Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Previous Message Mario Weilguni 2006-05-10 07:41:46 Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mario Weilguni 2006-05-10 08:14:22 Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Previous Message Mario Weilguni 2006-05-10 07:41:46 Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error