Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26899.1147241958@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BEGIN inside transaction should be an error (Dennis Bjorklund <db@zigo.dhs.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dennis Bjorklund <db@zigo.dhs.org> writes: > Yesterday I helped a guy on irc with a locking problem, he thought > that locking in postgresql was broken. It turned out that he had a PHP > function that he called inside his transaction and the function did BEGIN > and COMMIT. Since BEGIN inside a transaction is just a warning what > happend was that the inner COMMIT ended the transaction and > released the locks. The rest of his commands ran with autocommit > and no locks and he got broken data into the database. > 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? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: