RE: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Ed Loehr" <eloehr(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com>
Cc: "Joachim Achtzehnter" <joachim(at)kraut(dot)bc(dot)ca>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Rex McMaster" <rmcm(at)compsoft(dot)com(dot)au>
Subject: RE: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.
Date: 2000-04-27 03:46:06
Message-ID: 000401bfaffb$1dfc7680$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ed [mailto:ed]On Behalf Of Ed Loehr
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > You should call SET TRANSACTION immediately after BEGIN.
> > Note that SET TRANSACTION .. is per transaction command.
> >
> > PostgreSQL's SERIALIZABLE isolation level would allow both inserts.
> > READ COMMITED isolation level wouldn't allow A's inserts.
>
> Even if I call SET after BEGIN, it is not consistent with docs or the
> standard (see pghackers discussion under same subject), as the two scripts
> below seem to demonstrate.
>

Hmm,the magic query ???
Snapshot may be created when the first query is issued though
I don't remember well.

>
> This sequence, AFAICT, appears to fail the SERIALIZABLE standard, allowing
> A to see effects from B that permute the serializability...
>

AFAIK,serializability doesn't imply permutability.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message rmcm 2000-04-27 03:49:51 Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.
Previous Message Lincoln Yeoh 2000-04-27 03:08:51 Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.