Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error

Peter Eisentraut skrev:
> 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.
>
>   
And it would follow sql99 that demand an error. I'm surprised
everyone seems to ignore that part (except maybe Peter who is the
one I happend to reply to :-).

A guc that people can turn off if they have old broken code, that
would work for me.

/Dennis