Is transaction name has to be unique?

Hi

I remember that once I had a problem when using a cursor in a sp and when several instances of the sp were running I had a problem when the first sp in the sequence deallocated the cursor and all the other who run in parallel had errors...
Well, this is not the problem now, but my question is, if I have a sp that has begin tran t1, and several instances of the sp are running in parallel, and each of course has begin tran t1, should I expect the same collision effect like with the cursor? Is every tran has to be with unique name? Or maybe the server knows how to manage this and when one tran has started and another sp tried to start another with the same name it makes it wait until the first one committed or rolled back?

Thanks,
Inon.I would think that this would be a particularly bad idea, though I have no specific experience in this area (transaction numbers). As I always understood it, the idea behind an explicitly identified transaction was to be able to roll back that specific transaction, particularly in an asynchronous environment. You have to ask yourself, what is the value in re-using the same transaction identifier? If you are just going to re-use the same identifier, then why bother with an identifier at all?

Regards,

hmscott