Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51.11.1\))
Subject: Re: Nested Stored Procedures - ERROR:  invalid transaction
 termination 2D000
From: Christophe Pettus <xof@thebuild.com>
In-Reply-To: <IA0PR19MB721723603709836EE5D0B17E8FDA2@IA0PR19MB7217.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 09:01:51 +0000
Cc: "pgsql-general@postgresql.org" <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <12B83964-7B3B-4345-9952-F8FE61727CB5@thebuild.com>
References: <IA0PR19MB721723603709836EE5D0B17E8FDA2@IA0PR19MB7217.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
To: Kevin Stephenson <kjs714@hotmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/12B83964-7B3B-4345-9952-F8FE61727CB5%40thebuild.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

> On Mar 22, 2025, at 08:38, Kevin Stephenson <kjs714@hotmail.com> =
wrote:
>     =E2=80=A2 When a top-level stored procedure is called it =
implicitly creates a TX if there is no current TX.
>     =E2=80=A2 When a BEGIN/EXCEPTION block is used it implicitly =
creates a subTX for that block.

These statements are correct.

>     =E2=80=A2 When a nested stored procedure is called it implicitly =
creates a subTX for that invocation.

This one is not.  (Although the behavior you are looking for may not =
depend on that.)

A procedure cannot issue top-level transaction control statements from =
within an exception block, and attempting to do so raises the error you =
saw.  This includes procedures that are called from within an exception =
block.=