Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kyle Kingsbury <aphyr(at)jepsen(dot)io>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
Date: 2020-06-01 04:19:16
Message-ID: CA+hUKGKZ6fxeFS9GwfBMpCccpOPM1mhpX4KkXtB6b3uHk8MjwA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 4:05 PM Kyle Kingsbury <aphyr(at)jepsen(dot)io> wrote:
> I'll also see about getting a version of these tests that doesn't involve ON CONFLICT, in case that's relevant.

That should be interesting. I'm wondering if the read of the old
value in the UPDATE case is not done with appropriate predicate locks,
so we miss a graph edge?

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2020-06-01 04:20:30 Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
Previous Message Kyle Kingsbury 2020-06-01 04:05:19 Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation