Re: Nested xacts: looking for testers and review

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 03:39:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> END doesn't so directly imply that you are trying to commit a failed
>> transaction.

> The problem with END is how about executing it inside a PL/pgSQL
> function. Can we distinguish it from plpgsql's END?

We're going to have to deal with that on the BEGIN side anyway.
A reasonable possibility would be to require the TRANSACTION word
to appear when you do it in plpgsql.

> Also, COMMITing an aborted main transaction is the same as ENDing it;
> and in fact, it's the same as ROLLBACK. Why is it more confusing for a
> subtransaction to behave the same?

But the point here is that the behavior would *not* be the same.

regards, tom lane