From: | "Richard Broersma" <richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Paul Tomblin" <ptomblin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: OT: Question about transactions |
Date: | 2008-08-12 20:21:53 |
Message-ID: | 396486430808121321y1b65ba99q561c1a9fa820a1ae@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Paul Tomblin <ptomblin(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> is there a way for the other JVMs to get a consistent view
> of the database?
My understanding is that PostgreSQL only supports two forms of
transaction Isolation: READ COMMITED AND SERIALIZABLE. This means
that only the client that has opened the transaction can see
un-commited data. All other client instances will see only the
commited data.
> For instance, if program 1 updates something in the
> database and commits, and then tells everybody that's it's updated,
> and then deletes the item from the database and commits, and then
> tells everybody that it's deleted,
I'm not to sure on this one. If the other JVM are using a seperate
connection, I wouldn't expect you to be able to achieve consistant
results. However, maybe postgreSQL's LISTEN and NOTIFY will do what
you need?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-listen.html
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-notify.html
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2008-08-12 20:54:10 | Re: OT: Question about transactions |
Previous Message | Paul Tomblin | 2008-08-12 20:13:01 | PreparedStatement timeouts? |