Re: Add a new table for Transaction Isolation?

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:08:15PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 02:15:20PM +0000, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> > > I went with "Allowed, but not in PG" for those two fields, and
> > > removed the extra rows I had added. You can see the output here:
> > >
> > > http://momjian.us/expire/transaction-iso.html
> >
> >
> > Looks great!
> >
> > The only suggestion I can think to make to the table itself is to
> > make the new column header singular, to match the other columns.
> > I do think we should define the term used in the new column header;
> > maybe something like this:
> >
> >
> > serialization anomaly
> >
> > The result of successfully committing a group of transactions
> > is inconsistent with all possible orderings of running those
> > transactions one at a time.
>
> OK, output updated:
>
> http://momjian.us/expire/transaction-iso.html

Patch applied.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +