Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dennis Bjorklund
Subject Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
Date
Msg-id 44620870.4030906@zigo.dhs.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List 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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Markus Schaber
Date:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal
Next
From: "Gurjeet Singh"
Date:
Subject: Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error