| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add a new table for Transaction Isolation? |
| Date: | 2015-04-16 01:21:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20150416012128.GB1672@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:00:38PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/transaction-iso.html
>
> Table 13-1 shows the SQL standard isolation levels and what is and is not
> guaranteed. Then the text goes on to explain how our implementation differs
> from that table. Is there any opposition to actually adding a similar table,
> 13-2, probably right after the paragraph, with the same columns, three rows,
> and the corresponding possible/not-possible cell values?
Yes, it does make sense to have a table that properly matches the
Postgres implementation. Should I write a patch or would you like to?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2015-04-16 01:26:00 | Re: Add a new table for Transaction Isolation? |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2015-04-14 03:00:38 | Add a new table for Transaction Isolation? |