> On 5 Jun 2023, at 09:22, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> Please see attached the patch that introduces this new feature.
This patch fails the guc_check test due to something missing in the sample
configuration. Please send a rebased version with this test fixed.
[08:31:26.680] --- stdout ---
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Hello
It is one of those features that a handful of people would
On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 4:33 PM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 12:53:23PM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
> >
> > I have an application for this: creating various dev/test versions of data
> > from production.
> >
> > Start by restoring a copy of production from backup.
On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 12:32 AM Laurenz Albe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2023-06-05 at 00:22 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 8:01 AM Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > >
> > > This is a proposal for a new transaction characteristic. I haven't
> > > written any code, yet, and am interested
On Mon, 2023-06-05 at 00:22 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 8:01 AM Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> >
> > This is a proposal for a new transaction characteristic. I haven't
> > written any code, yet, and am interested in hearing if others may find
> > this feature useful.
>
>
ble, so that the transaction does not
> accidentally get committed.
>
> This feature would allow the user to mark a transaction such that it
> can never be committed. We must allow such marker to be placed when
> the transaction is being started, or while it's in progress.
The user can mark the t
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 12:53:23PM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
>
> I have an application for this: creating various dev/test versions of data
> from production.
>
> Start by restoring a copy of production from backup. Then successively
> create several altered versions of the data and save
On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 at 11:01, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> This is a proposal for a new transaction characteristic. I haven't
> written any code, yet, and am interested in hearing if others may find
> this feature useful.
>
> Many a times we start a transaction that we never intend to commit;
> for
This is a proposal for a new transaction characteristic. I haven't
written any code, yet, and am interested in hearing if others may find
this feature useful.
Many a times we start a transaction that we never intend to commit;
for example, for testing, or for EXPLAIN ANALYZE, or after detecting
