Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dennis Bjorklund
Тема Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Дата
Msg-id 44620870.4030906@zigo.dhs.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
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



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Markus Schaber
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Следующее
От: "Gurjeet Singh"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error