Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I realize the transaction status varies from query to query, so that can
> > be hard-wired into the protocol --- but the other ones seem mostly to be
> > cases where you don't want the user changing something behind the back
> > of the interface.
>
> Right.
>
> > If we give the interface more control, we don't have
> > to report back the SET status.
>
> That seems to be going in the wrong direction, though, in terms of
> flexibility.
I was just trying to avoid the interface complexity _if_ preventing SET
was all that was needed.
-- 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
