Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
Cc: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>,Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction
Date: 2002-04-26 02:22:22
Message-ID: 200204260222.g3Q2MMY11509@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> >
> > Marc is suggesting we may want to match Oracle somehow.
> >
> > I just want to have our SET work on a sane manner.
> 
> As do I.  But to Marc's suggestion, we discussed an oracle compatibility
> factor in the past and it was dismissed.  I seem to recall someone even
> volunteering to write it for us.

Yes, doing SET the Oracle way would be part of a much larger project
that turns on Oracle compatibility.  We can add some comment to the code
and come back to this area if we start to consider an Oracle mode more
seriously.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-04-26 02:25:06
Subject: Re: What is wrong with hashed index usage?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-04-26 02:20:49
Subject: Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group