Re: timeout implementation issues

Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > I guess it's a matter of definition: Do you consider SET variables
> > > database state or session metadata? I think some are this and some are
> > > that. I'm not sure how to draw the line, but throwing everything from one
> > > category into the other isn't my favorite solution.
> >
> > You seem to be suggesting that we should make a variable-by-variable
> > decision about whether SET variables roll back on ABORT or not. I think
> > that way madness lies; we could spend forever debating which vars are
> > which, and then who will remember without consulting the documentation?
> >
> > I feel we should just do it. Yeah, there might be some corner cases
> > where it's not the ideal behavior; but you haven't convinced me that
> > there are more cases where it's bad than where it's good. You sure
> > haven't convinced me that it's worth making SET's behavior
> > nigh-unpredictable-without-a-manual, which is what per-variable behavior
> > would be.
>
> I am with Tom on this one. (Nice to see he is now arguing on my side.)

I vote against you. If a variable is local to the session, you
can change it as you like without bothering any other user(session).
Automatic resetting of the varibales is rather confusing to me.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue