From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Pavlo Golub <pavlo(dot)golub(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: `transaction_read_only` GUC undocumented |
Date: | 2019-01-23 06:14:22 |
Message-ID: | 20190123061422.GK3873@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 01:07:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
>> transaction_read_only is listed in src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c, so we
>> could put a description close to default_transaction_read_only in
>> config.sgml, except that transaction_read_only sets the current
>> transaction's read-only status.
>
> Do we really want to document that? It's not the standard-approved
> way of making a transaction read-only.
i'd rather document them clearly rather than letting them around with
users guessing what they actually do (remember the recent thread about
replication parameter in connection strings). By the way, I can see
that transaction_deferrable and transaction_isolation are not around
either...
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavlo Golub | 2019-01-23 06:56:04 | Re: `transaction_read_only` GUC undocumented |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-01-23 06:07:31 | Re: `transaction_read_only` GUC undocumented |