| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, Jessica Perry Hekman <jphekman(at)dynamicdiagrams(dot)com>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Date: | 2002-04-09 13:20:22 |
| Message-ID: | 28457.1018358422@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> writes:
> It's good point. Why not make it more transparent? You want
> encapsulate it to standard and current SET statement, but if it's
> something different why not use for it different statement?
> SET SESSION search_path TO 'something';
But a plain SET is also setting the value for the session. What's
the difference? Why should a user remember that he must use this
syntax for search_path, and not for any other variables (or perhaps
only one or two other ones, further down the road)?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Emberson | 2002-04-09 15:14:08 | Re: now() AT TIME ZONE 'GMT'; |
| Previous Message | John Gray | 2002-04-09 09:11:02 | Re: unknownin/out patch (was [HACKERS] PQescapeBytea is |