| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |
| Date: | 2013-11-29 04:04:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20131129040425.GL5513@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Johnston wrote:
> In all of these cases we are assuming that the user understands that
> emitting a warning means that something is being logged to disk and thus is
> causing a resource drain.
>
> I like explicitly saying that issuing these commands is pointless/"has no
> effect"; being indirect and saying that the only thing they do is emit a
> warning omits any explicit explicit explanation of why. And while I agree
> that logging the warning is an effect; but it is not the primary/direct
> effect that the user cares about.
Honestly I still prefer what I proposed initially, which AFAICS has all
the properties you deem desirable in the wording:
"issuing ROLLBACK outside a transaction emits a warning and otherwise has no effect".
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-11-29 04:17:02 | Re: TODO: Split out pg_resetxlog output into pre- and post-sections |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-11-29 04:00:35 | Re: MultiXact truncation, startup et al. |