David Johnston wrote:
> In all of these cases we are assuming that the user understands that
> emitting a warning means that something is being logged to disk and thus is
> causing a resource drain.
>
> I like explicitly saying that issuing these commands is pointless/"has no
> effect"; being indirect and saying that the only thing they do is emit a
> warning omits any explicit explicit explanation of why. And while I agree
> that logging the warning is an effect; but it is not the primary/direct
> effect that the user cares about.
Honestly I still prefer what I proposed initially, which AFAICS has all
the properties you deem desirable in the wording:
"issuing ROLLBACK outside a transaction emits a warning and otherwise has no effect".
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
