X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Received: from alvh.no-ip.org (CM-lcon-149-19.cm.vtr.net [200.83.149.19]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A961474E5C for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:15:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 0ED3280081; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:15:50 -0400 (CLT) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:15:49 -0400 From: Alvaro Herrera To: Bruce Momjian Cc: Peter Eisentraut , Tom Lane , PostgreSQL Development Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign Message-ID: <20030318231549.GB2577@dcc.uchile.cl> References: <200303182218.h2IMI2I13909@candle.pha.pa.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200303182218.h2IMI2I13909@candle.pha.pa.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Archive-Number: 200303/739 X-Sequence-Number: 36985 On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 05:18:02PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > > > What if folks want all their connections autocommit off. > > > > For interactive use, people can record their preferred setting in > > ~/.psqlrc or something like that. > > But that only works for psql, right? How would this be done at the > libpq level? Environment variables? GUC seems a whole lot cleaner. I think an environment variable would be right. The current method is not clean in the sense that a client cannot decide what she wants; she just accepts the decision from the DBA. Thus, an application can't be written with a certain value in mind, because the DBA can change the setting at any time. Client-side decision is the wiser proposal, I think. > I understand. I just don't see any value in pushing that logic into > each client when we can do it centrally in the server. The server doesn't know beforehand what the client wants. -- Alvaro Herrera () "No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada"