| From: | Bob Smith <bsmith(at)h-e(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-sql <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Transaction isolation and UNION queries | 
| Date: | 2003-02-28 02:40:46 | 
| Message-ID: | 0A27C204-4AC6-11D7-978F-0003933DD370@h-e.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin | 
I have a question about transaction isolation that I can't find an 
answer to in the docs.  I'm working with a database that has some data 
split over two tables.  One table is the ultimate destination for all 
the data, the other is a "pending" table which holds rows during data 
entry.  Rows from the pending table are moved to the permanent table 
once data entry is complete.  For some purposes I want to see rows from 
both tables, so I do a UNION.  My question is, with only read committed 
isolation, could a commit by another transaction make changes appear 
between the separate parts of the UNION query?  In other words, could a 
row appear to be missing or duplicated because a transaction that was 
moving the row from pending to permanent committed while the UNION was 
running?
Thanks!
Bob Smith
Hammett & Edison, Inc.
bsmith(at)h-e(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shanmugasundaram Doraisamy | 2003-02-28 03:09:10 | shared memory usage - reg. | 
| Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2003-02-27 22:50:48 | Re: pg_hba.conf |