| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: our checks for read-only queries are not great |
| Date: | 2020-01-13 10:57:53 |
| Message-ID: | 5d268ba7-f29c-f928-1465-d0b139c7d645@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-01-10 14:41, Robert Haas wrote:
> This rule very nearly matches the current behavior: it explains why
> temp table operations are allowed, and why ALTER SYSTEM is allowed,
> and why REINDEX etc. are allowed. However, there's a notable
> exception: PREPARE, COMMIT PREPARED, and ROLLBACK PREPARED are allowed
> in a read-only transaction. Under the "doesn't change pg_dump output"
> criteria, the first and third ones should be permitted but COMMIT
> PREPARED should be denied, except maybe if the prepared transaction
> didn't do any writes (and in that case, why did we bother preparing
> it?). Despite that, this rule does a way better job explaining the
> current behavior than anything else suggested so far.
I don't follow. Does pg_dump dump prepared transactions?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Juan José Santamaría Flecha | 2020-01-13 12:04:48 | Re: Allow to_date() and to_timestamp() to accept localized names |
| Previous Message | John Naylor | 2020-01-13 10:46:01 | Re: benchmarking Flex practices |