From: | Lukas Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Date: | 2006-05-10 06:25:24 |
Message-ID: | 44618754.1060107@pooteeweet.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> writes:
>> Yesterday I helped a guy on irc with a locking problem, he thought
>> that locking in postgresql was broken. It turned out that he had a PHP
>> function that he called inside his transaction and the function did BEGIN
>> and COMMIT. Since BEGIN inside a transaction is just a warning what
>> happend was that the inner COMMIT ended the transaction and
>> released the locks. The rest of his commands ran with autocommit
>> and no locks and he got broken data into the database.
>
>> Could we make BEGIN fail when we already are in a transaction?
>
> We could, but it'd probably break about as many apps as it fixed.
> I wonder whether php shouldn't be complaining about this, instead
> --- doesn't php have its own ideas about controlling where the
> transaction commit points are?
There are no API calls to start/end transactions in php. However there
is a way to get the current transaction status:
http://de3.php.net/manual/en/function.pg-transaction-status.php
Also whatever decision is made one day PostGreSQL might want to
supported nested transactions similar to firebird.
regards,
Lukas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2006-05-10 06:25:36 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-10 06:19:18 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2006-05-10 06:25:36 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-10 06:19:18 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |