Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:24:35AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian escribió:
>
> > OK, here is a patch which changes ABORT from NOTICE to WARNING, and SET
> > from ERROR (which is new in 9.4) to WARNING.
>
> I don't like that this patch changes RequireTransactionChain() from
> actually requiring one, to a function that maybe requires a transaction
> chain, and maybe it only complains about there not being one.  I mean,
> it's like you had named the new throwError boolean as "notReally" or
> something like that.  Also, the new comment paragraph is bad because it
> explains who must pass true/false, instead of what's the effect of each
> value (and let the callers choose which value to pass).
>
> I would create a separate function to implement this, maybe
> WarnUnlessInTransactionBlock() or something like that.  That would make
> the patch a good deal smaller (because not changing existing callers).

Good points.  I have modified the attached patch to do as you suggested.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +