Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Yes, rereading the config file would kill my idea --- but what API are
> > we going to pass SET to applications?
>
> Passing the info up the client-side stack is an issue, yes, but it will
> be so in any case. If it's not there in the protocol we haven't even
> got a foothold to solve the problem ...
>
> > Sure, but how are we going to treat SET in the client?
>
> Not following your concern here. SET is what it always was.
The question is whether a client-side implementation of autocommit is
going to allow SET to being a transaction when autocommit is off.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073