| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Morten Hustveit <morten(at)eventures(dot)vc>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |
| Date: | 2013-11-19 18:17:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20131119181716.GD22498@alap2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-11-19 13:14:34 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 07:12:32PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > But even if that weren't a concern, the fact that BEGIN does it one way
> > currently doesn't seem very indicative of changing other historical behaviour.
>
> Look at this gem, which returns notice:
>
> test=> ABORT;
> NOTICE: there is no transaction in progress
> ROLLBACK
> test=>
>
> We are all over the map on this! The big question is whether we want to
> add some sanity to this, or just leave it alone, and if we leave it
> alone, what pattern do we use for the new checks?
I think changing a NOTICE into a WARNING or the reverse is fine,
changing a WARNING/NOTICE into an ERROR or the reverse is something
which should be done only very hesitantly.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Atri Sharma | 2013-11-19 18:18:28 | Re: stats for network traffic WIP |
| Previous Message | David Johnston | 2013-11-19 18:16:59 | Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |