Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:41:46AM +0200, Mario Weilguni wrote:
>
>>>>Could we make BEGIN fail when we already are in a transaction?
>>>
>>>We could, but it'd probably break about as many apps as it fixed.
>>>I wonder whether php shouldn't be complaining about this, instead
>>>--- doesn't php have its own ideas about controlling where the
>>>transaction commit points are?
>>
>>In fact it would break many application, so it should be at least controllable
>>by a setting or GUC.
>
>
> You want to make a GUC that makes:
>
> BEGIN;
> BEGIN;
>
> Leave you with an aborted transaction? That seems like a singularly
> useless feature...
>
> Have a nice day,
Or if you really want to screw things up, you could require COMMIT; COMMIT; to
finish off the transaction started by BEGIN; BEGIN; We could just silently keep
the transaction alive after the first COMMIT; ;)
