Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > > The current way is ok for me at the moment. I still think there is a better > > way (parsing statements like it's already done for > > no-transaction-allowed-statements), but hey, as soon as your patch will be > > applied, I can myself propose another patch to improve this. ;-) > > Parsing the statment will not help: even if the statement is a savepoint, we > need to wrap it in case we need to roll it back. The only other option I > can see to my patch is to, upon a successful user savepoint creation, > roll back their savepoint and immediately reissue it. That seems worse to > me than having N*2 savepoints though.
Agreed. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
