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

Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction

From: Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>,Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>,Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction
Date: 2002-04-26 08:46:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Marc G. Fournier writes:
 > Myself, I wonder why Oracle went the route they went ... does anyone have
 > access to a Sybase / Informix system, to confirm how they do it?  Is
 > Oracle the 'odd man out', or are we going to be that?  *Adding* something
 > (ie. DROP TABLE rollbacks) that nobody appears to have is one thing ...
 > but changing the behaviour is a totally different ..

FWIW, Ingres also doesn't rollback SET. However all its SET
functionality is the sort of stuff you wouldn't assume to rollback:

 work locations

You cannot do something sane like modify the date output through SET.


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2002-04-26 11:33:30
Subject: Re: WAL -> Replication
Previous:From: ShadDate: 2002-04-26 08:37:50
Subject: PSQL \x \l command issues

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group