Re: BEGIN WORK READ ONLY;

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PgSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BEGIN WORK READ ONLY;
Date: 2006-10-14 19:42:48
Message-ID: 11139.1160854968@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 11:35:12AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> What is the use case for a READ ONLY transaction?

> It would be handy for things like pgpool and Continuent, which could
> reliably distinguish up front the difference between a transaction
> that can write and one that can safely be sliced up and dispatched to
> read-only databases.

I don't think that works for PG's interpretation of READ ONLY, though.
IIRC we let a "read only" transaction create and modify temp tables.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Fuhr 2006-10-14 19:46:34 Re: BEGIN WORK READ ONLY;
Previous Message Michael Fuhr 2006-10-14 19:35:21 Re: BEGIN WORK READ ONLY;