Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Cc: Thomas Swan <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All
Date: 2004-07-02 23:43:47
Message-ID: 3555.1088811827@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> You can't have subtransactions inside an implicit transaction block,

It would be folly to design on that assumption.  We *will* have that
situation just as soon as plpgsql allows creating subtransactions
(which I trust you'll agree will happen soon).  All you have to do
is call such a function from a bare SELECT.  I do not think you'll
be able to legislate that people must say BEGIN first.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Oliver JowettDate: 2004-07-03 00:16:50
Subject: Re: [Re] Re: PREPARE and transactions
Previous:From: Jeroen T. VermeulenDate: 2004-07-02 23:33:42
Subject: Re: [Re] Re: PREPARE and transactions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group