Re: synchronized snapshots

On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 21:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: 
> attaching it to BEGIN feels natural to me.

My only objection is that people have different expectations about
whether the session will remain in a transaction block when they
encounter an error. So, it's hard to make this work without surprising
about half the users.

And there are some fairly significant consequences to users who guess
that they will remain in a transaction block in case of an error; or who
are just careless and don't consider that an error may occur.

> If we did add another toplevel command, what would we call it?

"SET TRANSACTION SNAPSHOT" perhaps?

Regards,Jeff Davis