| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>, 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 08:59:51 |
| Message-ID: | 200605101059.52837.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Am Mittwoch, 10. Mai 2006 10:10 schrieb Martijn van Oosterhout:
> You want to make a GUC that makes:
>
> BEGIN;
> BEGIN;
>
> Leave you with an aborted transaction? That seems like a singularly
> useless feature...
If a command doesn't do what it is supposed to do, then it should be an error.
That seems like a throroughly useful feature to me.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2006-05-10 09:44:39 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| Previous Message | Mario Weilguni | 2006-05-10 08:14:22 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2006-05-10 09:44:39 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| Previous Message | Mario Weilguni | 2006-05-10 08:14:22 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |