| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: tab completion for prepared transactions? |
| Date: | 2010-01-23 18:22:49 |
| Message-ID: | 1264270969.18154.4.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On lör, 2010-01-23 at 12:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Was there a designed-in reason not to have psql tab completion for
> > COMMIT/ROLLBACK PREPARED ...? It does complete the "PREPARED" but not
> > the transaction identifiers. Maybe it's not a common use case, but
> > these transaction identifiers sure can be nontrivial to type.
>
> Hmm, what's the use scenario? I would think that painfully long
> gxids would come from some XA manager software, which would be
> responsible for committing or canceling them. Manual override
> of that would usually be a bad idea.
The scenario that I encountered is that you go around manually cleaning
them up when the XA software fails for some reason.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-01-23 18:30:41 | Re: Miscellaneous changes to plperl [PATCH] |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2010-01-23 18:08:42 | Re: Cstring vs. Datum values ( BuildTupleFromCStrings vs. BlessTupleDesc) |