From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: akschoenberger@gmail.com
cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #17824: PQTRANS_ACTIVE misleading
In-reply-to: <17824-c7bd094991e5f1c5@postgresql.org>
References: <17824-c7bd094991e5f1c5@postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Wed, 08 Mar 2023 04:01:30 +0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <194318.1678292539.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 11:22:19 -0500
Message-ID: <194319.1678292539@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/194319.1678292539%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> The documentation for PQTRANS_ACTIVE [1] does not make explicitly clear that
> it is returned in *all* cases where there is a command in progress on an
> okay connection, and not just in the case that there is a command in
> progress inside of a transaction [2]. With a name like PQTRANS_ACTIVE, I
> believe it is worth making clear that it can happen when a transaction is
> not active.

The existing documentation defines it as "a command is in progress",
which seems perfectly clear to me --- adding more words would just
muddy the waters.

Also, if a command is running then the server *does* have a transaction
open -- it might be an auto-started, auto-committed one, but there's
always a transaction.  You seem to be using that word in a way that does
not correspond with common Postgres usage.  (Note that the definitions for
PQTRANS_INTRANS and PQTRANS_INERROR say "transaction block" not
"transaction", to comport with our usual terminology.)

			regards, tom lane