Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Morten Hustveit <morten(at)eventures(dot)vc>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block
Date: 2013-11-19 18:12:32
Message-ID: 20131119181232.GC22498@alap2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2013-11-19 13:09:16 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Why change the historical behaviour for savepoints?
>
> Because as Tom stated, we already do warnings for other useless
> transaction commands like BEGIN WORK inside a transaction block:

Which imo is a bad, bad historical accident. I've repeatedly seen this
hide bugs causing corrupted data in the end.

But even if that weren't a concern, the fact that BEGIN does it one way
currently doesn't seem very indicative of changing other historical behaviour.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Blackwell 2013-11-19 18:13:47 Re: stats for network traffic WIP
Previous Message Robert Haas 2013-11-19 18:12:20 Re: -d option for pg_isready is broken