Re: [Re] Re: PREPARE and transactions

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Re] Re: PREPARE and transactions
Date: 2004-06-25 02:00:12
Message-ID: d233ee25ff9740f0343193d8fc2439f1@biglumber.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> It seems like we are closing in on an agreement that that is what
> should happen.

I was originally unhappy with the current situation, but now I think
it is the best. Any changes will also cause a huge further headache
for driver/application writers, as we already have a released version
(and probably at least one more) with the current behavior. I'd be
all for making a DoesStatementExist(text) function, but changing
the behavior now may be closing the barn doors too late in the game,
and I've yet to see a totally convincing argument for a change,
considering that prepared statements are very explicitly declared
and cannot be seen outside of their own connection.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200406242200

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFA24ehvJuQZxSWSsgRAkP+AJ9UZD52+BHhnskdwdgHJGvxZ44KbQCggAxl
+5K2gZS37iH60UpiLgumwIU=
=kJgm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2004-06-25 03:25:21 Re: Fixing pg_dump
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2004-06-24 23:53:27 Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids