| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] nested xacts and phantom Xids | 
| Date: | 2004-06-26 18:09:53 | 
| Message-ID: | 874qoy5gy6.fsf@stark.xeocode.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches | 
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> It has been suggested a couple of times that we should use a different
> syntax for subtransactions than for main transactions.  This would for
> example allow things like
> 
> 
> BEGIN;
> 	do something;
> 	SUBBEGIN;
It might be awkward for clients like psql that will want to execute every
command in a nested transaction. It would mean they would have to know whether
the user has started a transaction or not in order to know whether to use
"BEGIN" or "SUBBEGIN". But I guess they would have to do that anyways unless
there's some protocol level way to indicate a query should be executed in a
nested transaction.
-- 
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jacob koehler (RRes-Roth) | 2004-06-26 19:20:51 | recursive SQL | 
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-06-26 17:28:23 | Re: PREPARE and transactions | 
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-26 23:56:09 | Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids | 
| Previous Message | Dennis Bjorklund | 2004-06-26 05:26:38 | Re: [PATCHES] nested xacts and phantom Xids |