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

Re: Transaction Snapshot Cloning

From: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Transaction Snapshot Cloning
Date: 2008-01-17 10:56:48
Message-ID: 478F3470.1020206@phlo.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not sure what the most convenient user API would be for an on-demand
> hard-read-only mode, but we can't use SET TRANSACTION READ ONLY for it.
> It'd have to be some other syntax.  Maybe just use a GUC variable
> instead of bespoke syntax?  SET TRANSACTION is really just syntactic
> sugar for GUC SET operations anyway ...

We could reuse the transaction_read_only GUC, adding "strict" as a 3rd 
allowed value beside "on" and "off". And maybe make "ansi" an alias for 
"on" to emphasize that one behavior is what the standard wants, and the 
other is a postgres extension.

regards, Florian Pflug


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Florian G. PflugDate: 2008-01-17 11:30:36
Subject: Re: Postgresql Materialized views
Previous:From: Brendan JurdDate: 2008-01-17 09:16:24
Subject: Re: to_char incompatibility

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