Re: determine snapshot after obtaining locks for first statement

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: determine snapshot after obtaining locks for first statement
Date: 2009-12-17 17:58:25
Message-ID: 4514.1261072705@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I wonder if RETURNING hasn't created a whole new set of cases where
> our READ COMMITTED behaviour is bogus.

I don't see how. It just gives you access to the same values that were
actually used by the UPDATE.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-12-17 17:58:30 Re: determine snapshot after obtaining locks for first statement
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2009-12-17 17:51:07 Re: determine snapshot after obtaining locks for first statement