On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 09:47:54AM -0600, Arthur Ward wrote: > >> While we're at it, what about temporary functions? > ... > > Whether it's worth the trouble is another question. What's the > > use-case? > > ... > > I don't find lack of temporary functions to be a hindrance. Perhaps it's a > nice double-check for cleaning up when something goes wrong, but in that > case, I'm likely to want things left behind for debugging, but the > function creation is probably going to be rolled back anyhow.
<Light goes on> Of course, all in one transaction. VIEW deleted on rollback anyway. You're right, rollback applies to anything, so this is not a really big deal. -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > (... have gone from d-i being barely usable even by its developers > anywhere, to being about 20% done. Sweet. And the last 80% usually takes > 20% of the time, too, right?) -- Anthony Towns, debian-devel-announce
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
