Re: Vote on SET in aborted transaction

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> OK, would people please vote on how to handle SET in an aborted
> transaction?  This vote will allow us to resolve the issue and move
> forward if needed.
> 
> In the case of:
> 
>         SET x=1;
>         BEGIN;
>         SET x=2;
>         query_that_aborts_transaction;
>         SET x=3;
>         COMMIT;
> 
> at the end, should 'x' equal:
> 
>         1 - All SETs are rolled back in aborted transaction
>         2 - SETs are ignored after transaction abort
>         3 - All SETs are honored in aborted transaction
>         ? - Have SETs vary in behavior depending on variable
> 
> Our current behavior is 2.
> 
> Please vote and I will tally the results.

Is it a vote in the first place ?
I will vote the current(2 + 3 + ?).

regards,
Hiroshi Inouehttp://w2422.nsk.ne.jp/~inoue/