Re: timeout implementation issues

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Loftis <mloftis(at)wgops(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: timeout implementation issues
Date: 2002-04-11 05:01:56
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0204102037570.684-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Lockhart writes:

> 1) All commands starting with "SET" must have the same transactional
> semantics. I'll agree that it might be nice for consistancy, but imho is
> not absolutely required.

This rule is already violated anyway. SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION, SET
CONSTRAINTS, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, and SET mostly_anything_else
already behave quite differently.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2002-04-11 05:02:49 Re: help with bison
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2002-04-11 05:01:35 Re: RFC: Restructuring pg_aggregate