| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Pet Peeves? |
| Date: | 2009-02-04 19:31:36 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150902041131w7a17c79bk2e813223679eec8d@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> - Stored procedures that can manage transactions (e.g. - contrast with
> present stored functions that forcibly live *inside* a transaction
> context; the point isn't functions vs procedures, but rather to have
> something that can do txn management)
IMO, once the current crop of in-progress features are rolled up (in
place upgrade, hot standby, etc)...this is one of two 'must have'
features...the other being revamped listen/notify.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Finneid | 2009-02-04 19:34:01 | case sensitive db name? |
| Previous Message | David Wall | 2009-02-04 19:02:49 | Array, bytea and large objects |