Re: A bad behavior under autocommit off mode

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > One idea is for SET to return a command tag that has more information,
> > like we do for INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE.  It could return the variable
> > modified and the new value.
> 
> But that doesn't solve the problem --- what about begin, set, rollback?
> What about absorbing a new value for a variable while re-reading
> postgresql.conf due to SIGHUP?
> 
> Unless you want to effectively disable all of the nice GUC behavior
> we've developed, I think you have to have a reporting mechanism that's
> separate from command completion.

Yes, rereading the config file would kill my idea --- but what API are
we going to pass SET to applications?  I can't think of a clean method,
yet.

> > Also, are we removing the behavior that SET _doesn't_ start a
> > transaction in autocommit off mode?
> 
> If we remove autocommit-off mode, it stops being an issue ;-)

Sure, but how are we going to treat SET in the client?

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073