Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction

Curt Sampson wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > NOTE that I *do* think that #1 is what *should* happen, but there should
> > be some way of turning off that behaviour so that we don't screw up ppl
> > expecting "Oracles behaviour" ...
>
> I don't think this follows. If it's only for people's expectations,
> but we default to #1, their expectations will be violated until
> they figure out that the option is there. After they figure out
> it's there, well, they don't expect it to behave like Oracle any
> more, so they don't need the switch, right?

Beeing able to "read" is definitely an advantage in the IT
world. Someone just has to do it before finishing the
implementation based on assumptions :-)

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #