On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On fre, 2010-09-03 at 16:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Part of the reason it's sat on TODO is lack of consensus about how
>> such a feature ought to look/work; particularly since most of the
>> discussion about it has considered that it'd go along with stored
>> procedures executing outside of transactions.
> I would probably be a mistake to tie these features together. They are
> tricky enough separately.
Hm, do you think it would be possible to request manual transaction
state when setting up the procedure (or reserve that ability for the
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Pavel Stehule||Date: 2010-09-07 13:27:29|
|Subject: Re: can we publish a aset interface?|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-09-07 12:16:12|
|Subject: Re: Synchronization levels in SR|