From: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8Kdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Repeatable read and serializable transactions see data committed after tx start |
Date: | 2015-03-25 02:08:45 |
Message-ID: | 551218AD.4010407@8Kdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24/03/15 20:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 04:43:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 09:53:18PM +0100, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
>>> On 07/11/14 22:02, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>>>> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>>>>>> I think most people have always assumed that
>>>>>> BEGIN starts the transaction and that is the point at
>>>>>> which the snapshot is obtained.
>>>>> But there is so much evidence to the contrary. Not only does the
>>>>> *name* of the command (BEGIN or START) imply a start, but
>>>>> pg_stat_activity shows the connection "idle in transaction" after
>>>>> the command (and before a snapshot is acquired)
>>>> Er...I think we are arguing the same thing here. So no contrary
>>>> needed? :)
>>> So do we agree to fix the docs? ^_^
>> Doc patch attached.
> Patch applied. Thanks for the report.
Awesome! Thanks! :)
Álvaro
--
Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
-----------
8Kdata
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2015-03-25 02:35:10 | Re: pgsql: btree_gin: properly call DirectFunctionCall1() |
Previous Message | Andrew Gierth | 2015-03-25 02:07:45 | Re: INT64_MIN and _MAX |