Re: A transaction in transaction? Possible?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Achilleus Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>, Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>
Cc: "Riccardo G(dot) Facchini" <abief_ag_-postgresql(at)yahoo(dot)com>, <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Theodore Petrosky <tedpet5(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Andrei Bintintan <klodoma(at)ar-sd(dot)net>, sad <sad(at)bankir(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: A transaction in transaction? Possible?
Date: 2004-11-10 15:23:50
Message-ID: 200411101623.50254.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Achilleus Mantzios wrote:
> Wouldn't make more sense to allow nested begin/commit/rollback
> blocks?

Possibly. But that consideration would have been more relevant about 6
years ago when they wrote the SAVEPOINT syntax into the SQL standard.
:)

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Achilleus Mantzios 2004-11-10 16:01:36 Re: A transaction in transaction? Possible?
Previous Message Achilleus Mantzios 2004-11-10 10:58:27 Re: A transaction in transaction? Possible?