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
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. |