Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> OK, we have three possibilities:
>
> o All SETs are honored in an aborted transaction
> o No SETs are honored in an aborted transaction
> o Some SETs are honored in an aborted transaction (current)
>
> I think the problem is our current behavior. I don't think anyone can
> say our it is correct (only honor SET before the transaction reaches
> abort state). Whether we want the first or second is the issue, I think.
I think the current state is not that bad at least
is better than the first. I don't think it's a
*should be* kind of thing and we shouldn't stick
to it any longer.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
