From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Brar Piening <brar@gmx.de>
cc: mike.adelson314@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #16988: Spurious "SET LOCAL can only be used in transaction
 blocks" warning using implicit transaction block
In-reply-to: <3a158f8d-708e-ad13-617a-af8349aae4f4@gmx.de>
References: <16988-58edba102adb5128@postgresql.org>
 <3044772.1619712195@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <3a158f8d-708e-ad13-617a-af8349aae4f4@gmx.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Brar Piening <brar@gmx.de>
	message dated "Sun, 02 May 2021 00:22:44 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3493685.1619912155.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 01 May 2021 19:35:55 -0400
Message-ID: <3493686.1619912155@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3493686.1619912155%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Brar Piening <brar@gmx.de> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
>>> I am using SET LOCAL in an Npgsql multi-statement command.

>> It seems that whatever Npgsql is doing at the wire protocol level
>> doesn't match this, but they'd have to explain what they are doing
>> for us to offer much help.

> At the wire protocol level npgsql sends this as two queries via the
> extended query protocol without a sync inbetween them.
> (Parse,Bind,Describe,Execute;Parse,Bind,Describe,Execute,Sync)

There is no implicit transaction block around the two commands in such
a case, so that explains why it doesn't act as Mike was hoping.

Omitting the Sync has zero effect on transactional semantics; it only
means that if the first command fails, we'll skip the second one.

			regards, tom lane