Re: timeout implementation issues

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Michael Loftis <mloftis(at)wgops(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: timeout implementation issues
Date: 2002-04-18 05:31:41
Message-ID: 6930.1019107901@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I have added this to the TODO list, with a question mark. Hope this is
> OK with everyone.

> o Abort SET changes made in aborted transactions (?)

Actually, I was planning to make only search_path act that way, because
of all the push-back I'd gotten on applying it to other SET variables.
search_path really *has* to have it, but if there's anyone who agrees
with me about doing it for all SET vars, they didn't speak up :-(

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Clift 2002-04-18 06:36:32 Re: new food for the contrib/ directory
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-04-18 05:24:37 Re: [PATCHES] YADP - Yet another Dependency Patch