| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, "leiyanliang(at)highgo(dot)com" <leiyanliang(at)highgo(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3 |
| Date: | 2021-07-17 17:24:08 |
| Message-ID: | 202107171724.hycens5f43ho@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 2021-Jul-17, Tom Lane wrote:
> I've concluded that we should just document them (and am working
> on that right now). It's certainly true that there is a use-case
> for reading them: libpq does "SHOW transaction_read_only", for
> example. And since we've gone to the trouble of making SET of one
> of these equivalent to SET TRANSACTION, we should probably just
> document that it is.
Maybe include "SET NAMES" while at it? It drove me crazy when I found
out that was accepted, last year.
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-07-17 19:21:39 | Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3 |
| Previous Message | Andrey Borodin | 2021-07-17 17:01:00 | Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY does not index prepared xact's data |