>>>>> "MM" == Mike Matrigali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MM> I like option 1, make sure it is well documented. I actually lean
MM> toward even stronger, have the command commit the current transaction
MM> before and after the backup.
Generally, I do not like such implicit commits. It is likely to catch
someone by surprise. On the other, I do not think many people would
intentionally do backup as part of a larger transaction.
In my opinion, the ideal solution would be to execute backup in a
nested transaction. I do not know whether it is worth the effort.
--
Øystein
