Re: Single-Transaction Utility options

Tom Lane wrote:
> I believe Peter's question was rhetorical: what he meant to point out
> is that the documentation needs to explain what is the reason for
> having this switch, ie, in what cases would you use it or not use it?
> Just saying what it does isn't really adequate docs.

I once considered implementing this myself but found it infeasible for
some reason I don't remember. Nevertheless I always thought that
having an atomic restore ought to be a non-optional feature. Are there
situations where one would not want to use it? (And if so, which one
is the more normal case?)

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/