Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)frogthinker(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions
Date: 2009-01-07 13:17:49
Message-ID: 4964AB7D.5030905@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> "is a natural consequence of the fact" --- There is nothing natural
>> about any of this. Why is it a consequence and how?
>
> How could you possibly get any of those phenomena if there are no
> concurrent transactions?

I see what you mean now, but you could write out that logic in more detail.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-01-07 13:22:52 Re: Solve a problem of LC_TIME of windows.
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2009-01-07 13:11:35 error code 25001