| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] BEGIN vs START TRANSACTION |
| Date: | 2003-11-09 15:18:18 |
| Message-ID: | 3269.1068391098@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I object to adding unnecessary complications like that.
> Shouldn't BEGIN and START TRANSACTION have the same mechanics? The
> changes to the code were the addition of only one line. The rest of the
> patch was docs.
My initial reaction was the same as Peter's, but after seeing the small
size of the patch I reconsidered. It seems to make sense that BEGIN
should be an exact synonym for START TRANSACTION.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Patrick Welche | 2003-11-09 20:27:08 | NetBSD/acorn32 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-09 15:10:06 | Re: Coding help |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-11-09 18:02:56 | Small Doc Patch |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-11-09 14:16:13 | Re: WIN32_DEV CVS branch |