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

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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: 2013-11-26 12:14:27
Message-ID: 20131126121427.GC24485@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:12:43PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Those things are not the same.
>
> Uh, I ended up mentioning "no effect" to highlight it does nothing,
> rather than mention a warning. Would people prefer I say "warning"? Or
> should I say "issues a warning because it has no effect" or something?
> It is easy to change.

I should also point out that in 9.3, ABORT outside of a transaction was
documented as issuing a warning, but issued a notice. git head now
issues a warning. That might be part of the confusion.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2013-11-26 12:17:11 Re: psql shows line number
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2013-11-26 12:12:21 Re: ToDo: fast update of arrays with fixed length fields for PL/pgSQL