Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 13:24:08 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
	"leiyanliang@highgo.com" <leiyanliang@highgo.com>,
	"pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3
Message-ID: <202107171724.hycens5f43ho@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <66575.1626534254@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202107171724.hycens5f43ho%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-Jul-17, Tom Lane wrote:

> I've concluded that we should just document them (and am working
> on that right now).  It's certainly true that there is a use-case
> for reading them: libpq does "SHOW transaction_read_only", for
> example.  And since we've gone to the trouble of making SET of one
> of these equivalent to SET TRANSACTION, we should probably just
> document that it is.

Maybe include "SET NAMES" while at it?  It drove me crazy when I found
out that was accepted, last year.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera              Valdivia, Chile  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/