Sean Chittenden wrote: > > I am fine with special casing autocommit. Is that what you are > > suggesting? > > I think he means: > > Ex: > SET autocommit TO off; > SHOW autocommit; > ROLLBACK; > # warning about being outside of a transaction > BEGIN; > SET autocommit TO on; > SHOW autocommit; # shows on > ROLLBACK; > SHOW autocommit; # shows off > > Only have the SET's in a transaction/rollback-able if they're made > inside of a transaction, otherwise leave them as atomic changes. -sc
But it seems so illogical that SET doesn't start a transaction, but if it is in a transaction, it is rolled back, and this doesn't help our statement_timeout example except to require that they do BEGIN to start the transaction even when autocommit is off. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
