| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BEGIN vs START TRANSACTION |
| Date: | 2003-10-27 09:00:14 |
| Message-ID: | 1067245214.460.7.camel@tokyo |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 19:22, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Hi all,
> why START TRANSACTION READ ONLY is allowed
> and not BEGIN READ ONLY ?
As Chris KL points out, it's not required by the standard (since BEGIN
isn't part of the standard to begin with). I suppose we could add it,
but it seems a little pointless -- "BEGIN ; SET ..." seems just as good.
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-10-27 09:26:27 | Re: BEGIN vs START TRANSACTION |
| Previous Message | Adam Witney | 2003-10-27 08:54:21 | Re: shared memory on OS X - 7.4beta4 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-10-27 09:26:27 | Re: BEGIN vs START TRANSACTION |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-10-27 03:15:56 | Re: BEGIN vs START TRANSACTION |