Re: BUG #17385: "RESET transaction_isolation" inside serializable transaction causes Assert at the transaction end

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 12:07:50AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
>> +      <entry><literal>NO_RESET</literal></entry>
>> +      <entry>Parameters with this flag do not support
>> +      <command>RESET</command> commands.
>> +      </entry>
>
> > As per the issue with SET commands used with functions, this
> > description does not completely reflect the reality.
>
> It seems adequate enough to me ... do you have a suggestion?

As we are talking about a description with GUC_ACTION_SAVE, something
like "Parameters with this flag do not support RESET, or SET in the
context of a function call"?  NO_RESET sounds a bit confusing as a
name if you consider this second part (it can be understood as
resetting the value as well), but keeping it as-is does not look like
a big deal to me with this description, or an equivalent, in place.
--
Michael