Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dennis Bjorklund
Тема Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All
Дата
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0407060811210.21809-100000@zigo.dhs.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>)
Ответы Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> > begin/end because they are already in an explicit/implicit transaction
> > by default...  How is the user/programmer to know when this is the case?
> 
> I'm not sure I understand you.  Of course you can issue begin/end.  What
> you can't do is issue begin/end inside a function -- you always use
> subbegin/subcommit in that case.

I've not understood why we need new tokens for this case. Maybe you've 
explained it somewhere that I've missed. But surely the server know if you 
are in a transaction or not, and can differentiate on the first BEGIN and 
the next BEGIN.

-- 
/Dennis Björklund



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bug with view definitions?
Следующее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Recovery Features