On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Btw, I believe that this is correct behavior, because in Peter's case the
>> manual command gets the priority on the value of synchronous_commit, no?
>> If anybody thinks that I am wrong, feel free to argue on that of course...
>
> The idea of canceling a COMMIT statement causing a COMMIT seems pretty
> strange to me.
It would be. But you are not cancelling the commit, you are
*attempting* to cancel the commit. The message you receive explains
to what extend your attempt succeeded.
Cheers,
Jeff
