Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All

Dennis Bjorklund <db@zigo.dhs.org> writes:
> On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Mike Rylander wrote:
>> Nested transactions and savepoints serve two different purposes.  They have
>> some overlap, but for the most part solve two distinct problems.

> Then show some examples that illustrait the difference. So far all 
> examples shown that uses subtransactions could just as well have been 
> written using savepoints.

And vice versa.  It's a matter of convenience of notation, and I tend
to agree with Mike's comment that each wins in some cases.

> Savepoints have more possibilities, you can invalidate older savepoints 
> then the last 

Nonsense.  Invalidating an older savepoint must invalidate everything
after it as well.  The fact that the savepoint syntax allows you to
express conceptually-ridiculous operations (like that one) is not a
point in its favor IMHO.
        regards, tom lane