| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
| Date: | 2002-04-25 15:50:27 |
| Message-ID: | 200204251550.g3PFoRc18121@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> Just curious here, but has anyone taken the time to see how others are
> doing this? For instance, if we go with 1, are going against how everyone
> else handles it? IMHO, its not a popularity contest ...
Yes, good point. I don't know that they use SET, but if they do, we
should find out how they handle it, though I doubt they have thought
through their SET handling as well as we have. My guess is that they do
3, honor all SETs.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-04-25 16:48:13 | Re: md5 passwords and pg_shadow |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-25 15:44:49 | Re: pid gets overwritten in OSX |