Re: Vote on SET in aborted transaction

Jan Wieck wrote:
> 
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > >     Sure  should  it!  You  gave  an example for the need to roll
> > >     back, because
> > >  otherwise you would  end  up  with  an  invalid
> > >     search path "foo".
> >
> > What's wrong with it ? The insert command after *rollback*
> > would fail. It seems the right thing to me. Otherwise
> > the insert command would try to append the data of the
> > table t1 to itself. The insert command is for copying
> > schema1.t1 to foo.t1 in case the previous create schema
> > command suceeded.
> 
>     Wrong about your entire example is that the rollback is sheer
>     wrong placed to make up your case ;-p

Is this issue on the wrong(? not preferable) sequnence
of calls ?
Please don't miss the point.

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