| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chris(dot)kings-lynne(at)calorieking(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| Date: | 2006-05-10 06:26:52 |
| Message-ID: | 446187AC.1070502@calorieking.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> 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?
All PHP does is when the connection is returned to the pool, if it is
still in a transaction, a rollback is issued.
The guy needs to do his own tracking of transaction state if he wants to
avoid these problems...
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2006-05-10 07:33:16 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2006-05-10 06:25:36 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mario Weilguni | 2006-05-10 07:41:46 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2006-05-10 06:25:36 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |