| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
| Date: | 2002-04-26 02:20:49 |
| Message-ID: | 200204260220.g3Q2Kn511415@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >
> > Marc is suggesting we may want to match Oracle somehow.
> >
> > I just want to have our SET work on a sane manner.
>
> Myself, I wonder why Oracle went the route they went ... does anyone have
> access to a Sybase / Informix system, to confirm how they do it? Is
> Oracle the 'odd man out', or are we going to be that? *Adding* something
> (ie. DROP TABLE rollbacks) that nobody appears to have is one thing ...
> but changing the behaviour is a totally different ...
Yes, let's find out what the others do. I don't see DROP TABLE
rollbacking as totally different. How is it different from SET?
--
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 | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-26 02:22:22 | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-04-26 02:18:47 | Re: Sequential Scan Read-Ahead |