Re: Is replacing transactions with CTE a good idea?

No, but are they equivalent to serializable transactions?

> On Apr 1, 2021, at 11:04 PM, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)postgres(dot)rocks> wrote:
>
> 
>
>
>
>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 10:50, Glen Huang <heyhgl(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> From application’s standpoint, it seems using CTE saves a lot work. You no longer need to parse values out only to pass them back in, and only one round-trip to the db server.
>>
>> If I’m not wrong, CTE is equivalent to serializable transactions? So I guess the downsize is that quarries can’t be run in parallel?
>
> I do not think a CTE changes the isolation level.
>>
>> If I decide to replace all my transaction code with CTE, will I shoot myself in the foot down the road?
>
>
> Dave Cramer
> www.postgres.rocks