From: | Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY |
Date: | 2021-09-23 03:51:21 |
Message-ID: | CAAJ_b94r=qBUPwPBe3FTttK5Lwh=td9ZhD5pMoXt4EQv8JtgAw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 7:33 PM Mark Dilger
<mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 22, 2021, at 6:39 AM, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, that is a bit longer, here is the snip from v35-0010 patch
>
> Right, that's longer, and only tests one interaction. The isolation spec I posted upthread tests multiple interactions between the session which uses cursors and the system going read-only. Whether the session using a cursor gets a FATAL, just an ERROR, or neither depends on where it is in the process of opening, using, closing and committing. I think that's interesting. If the implementation of the ALTER SESSION READ ONLY feature were to change in such a way as, for example, to make the attempt to open the cursor be a FATAL error, you'd see a change in the test output.
>
Agreed.
Regards,
Amul
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | wenjing | 2021-09-23 04:03:25 | Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables |
Previous Message | wenjing | 2021-09-23 03:48:56 | Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables |