Re: Nested xacts: looking for testers and review

Tom Lane wisely wrote:
> While we clearly want this functionality, I tend to agree with Barry
> that COMMIT IGNORE ABORT (and the other variants that have 
> been floated)
> is a horrid, confusing name for it.  I would suggest using 
> END with some
> modifier, instead.  Perhaps
> 
>     END [ WORK | TRANSACTION ] [ IGNORE ERRORS ]
> 
> END doesn't so directly imply that you are trying to commit a failed
> transaction.
> 

Would it make more sense to specify at the time the optional subtransaction
is committed that it is not critical to the completion of the outer
transaction?

BEGIN; BEGIN;   DROP TABLE foo; COMMIT NON_CRITICAL; CREATE TABLE foo (i int);
COMMIT;

I don't 'get' the nested transaction code, so I don't know how horrible this
would be to write. It just seemed more useful, because you could specify
which sub-transactions are show stoppers, and which ones aren't.

Or if I'm completely off base, please forgive my intrusion. 

Paul