On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 13:03 -0700, Neil Conway wrote: > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 15:50 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 10:29 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Somebody who wants the > > > above behavior can send "ROLLBACK; DISCARD ALL". > > > > ...which generates an ERROR if no transaction is in progress and fills > > the log needlessly. > > Well, it's a WARNING, but your point is taken. Can't a clueful interface > just check what the transaction status of the connection is, rather than > unconditionally issuing a ROLLBACK?
I think it can, but can't a clueful server do this and avoid the problem of non-clueful interfaces? This is making me think that we should just embed the session pool inside the server as well and have done with it. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
