"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would say that a GUC variable for such behavior as listed in the TODO
> is overzealous. We should either enforce it, or not. As we do not now,
> there is no reason imo to change it.

Not only is it overzealous, but the proposal to have one reflects a
failure to learn from history.  GUC variables that change
transaction-boundary semantics are a bad idea, period: see autocommit.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

               http://archives.postgresql.org

Reply via email to