Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction
| От | Bruce Momjian |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 200204251826.g3PIQ1E05320@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Okay, based on this, I'm pseudo-against ... I think, for reasons of > reducing headaches for ppl posting, there should be some sort of 'SET > oracle_quirks' operation that would allow for those with largish legacy > apps trying to migrate over to do so without having to check for "odd" > behaviours like this ... > > Or maybe "SET set_rollbacks = oracle"? with default being #1 as discussed Yes, I understand. However, seeing that we have gone 6 years with this never being an issue, I think we should just shoot for #1 and keep open to the idea of having a compatibility mode, and the possibility that #1 may not fit for all SET variables and we may have to do some special cases for those. My guess is that we should implement #1 and see what feedback we get in 7.3. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: