From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
Date: | 2002-04-29 18:13:44 |
Message-ID: | 20020429151038.Q15173-100000@mail1.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
> > If we go with your syntax I would prefer SET LOCAL to LOCAL SET , so
> > that LOCAL feels tied more to variable rather than to SET .
>
> I agree. I was originally thinking that that way might require LOCAL to
> become a reserved word, but we should be able to avoid it.
>
> With Thomas' nearby suggestion of SET SESSION ..., we'd have
>
> SET [ SESSION | LOCAL ] varname TO value
>
> and it only remains to argue which case is the default ;-)
Ah, I do like the syntax ... and would go with SESSION as default, but
that is based on me tinking about how 'local' variables work in perl,
where if you don't explicitly state its local, its automatically global
...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-29 18:19:14 | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-04-29 18:10:13 | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |