From: | "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su> |
---|---|
To: | Jan Wieck <jwieck(at)debis(dot)com> |
Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas <andreas(dot)zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at>, meskes(at)topsystem(dot)de, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Begin statement again |
Date: | 1998-03-25 03:43:44 |
Message-ID: | 35187D70.78E97527@sable.krasnoyarsk.su |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck wrote:
>
> Andreas wrote:
> >
> > I think we should depreciate the BEGIN/END keywords in SQL to allow them
> > to be used for the new PL/SQL. So definitely leave them out of ecpg now.
> > Only accept BEGIN WORK and BEGIN TRANSACTION. (do a sequence of commit work; begin work)
> > BTW.: why is a transaction always open ? A lot of programs would never need a
> > transaction. Is it because of cursors ?
>
> BEGIN/END in PL/SQL and PL/pgSQL doesn't mean transactions!
> It's just to group statements to a block. You cannot commit
> something inside a PostgreSQL function. All changes made by a
> function are covered by the statements transaction or the
> upper transaction block.
This will be changed - there is a way to implement nested transaction!
And so, some day we will need in something to start/end transaction
block inside functions.
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-03-25 05:33:15 | Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer fails? |
Previous Message | Michal Mosiewicz | 1998-03-25 03:17:18 | Optimizer fails? |