Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error
От | Jaime Casanova |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c2d9e70e0605092325g125f575bsb870513681d97ee8@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/10/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Dennis Bjorklund <db@zigo.dhs.org> writes: > > Yesterday I helped a guy on irc with a locking problem, he thought > > that locking in postgresql was broken. It turned out that he had a PHP > > function that he called inside his transaction and the function did BEGIN > > and COMMIT. Since BEGIN inside a transaction is just a warning what > > happend was that the inner COMMIT ended the transaction and > > released the locks. The rest of his commands ran with autocommit > > and no locks and he got broken data into the database. > > > Could we make BEGIN fail when we already are in a transaction? > > We could, but it'd probably break about as many apps as it fixed. > I wonder whether php shouldn't be complaining about this, instead > --- doesn't php have its own ideas about controlling where the > transaction commit points are? > > regards, tom lane > AFAIK php doesn't care about that... it just see for success or failure conditions, so if postgres said everything is ok it will continue... -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." Richard Cook
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: