Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction

From: Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
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: 2002-04-25 21:42:33
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.40.0204251740000.3369-100000@paprika.michvhf.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyle 2002-04-26 00:40:53 Re: Sequential Scan Read-Ahead
Previous Message Michael Loftis 2002-04-25 21:33:57 Re: What is wrong with hashed index usage?