| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Morten Hustveit <morten(at)eventures(dot)vc>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |
| Date: | 2013-11-28 22:32:30 |
| Message-ID: | 7F61FF9F-CE33-4B67-951B-1E94DC14A784@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Nov 28, 2013, at 5:18 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 04:51:14PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>>>> Seems broadly reasonable, but I'd use "no other effect" throughout.
>>>
>>> That sounds awkward, e.g.:
>>>
>>> Issuing <command>ROLLBACK</> outside of a transaction
>>> block emits a warning but has no other effect.
>>>
>>> I could live with this:
>>>
>>> Issuing <command>ROLLBACK</> outside of a transaction
>>> block has no effect except emitting a warning.
>>
>> I prefer the first version, but that's obviously a judgement call.
>
> How about:
>
> Issuing <command>ROLLBACK</> outside of a transaction
> block has the sole effect of emitting a warning.
Sure, that sounds OK.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-11-28 22:38:05 | Re: 9.2.1 & index-only scans : abnormal heap fetches after VACUUM FULL |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-11-28 22:18:28 | Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |