David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 11:35:12AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> What is the use case for a READ ONLY transaction?
> It would be handy for things like pgpool and Continuent, which could
> reliably distinguish up front the difference between a transaction
> that can write and one that can safely be sliced up and dispatched to
> read-only databases.
I don't think that works for PG's interpretation of READ ONLY, though.
IIRC we let a "read only" transaction create and modify temp tables.
regards, tom lane
