Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > +1 for adding parens; we might want to make a function of it > someday. Makes sense; will do. > I don't much like the "XactUses..." aspect of it; that's just > about meaningless, because almost everything in PG could be said > to be "used" by a transaction. How about > IsolationUsesXactSnapshot (versus IsolationUsesStmtSnapshot)? And IsolationIsSerializable to make that test symmetrical? Any objections to this plan? -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
