On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> That makes sense to me. The reason I didn't make that change when I
> added the serializable special case to pg_dump was that it seemed
> like a separate question; I didn't want to complicate an already big
> patch with unnecessary changes to non-serializable transactions.
>
If we agree, should we change that now ?
Thanks,
Pavan