Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> 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.
Oops does the first mean rolling back the variables on abort ?
If so I made a mistake. The current is better than the second.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
