| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgresql transactons not fully isolated |
| Date: | 2017-06-20 19:34:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZAwL6jQRGMfJZyF-6GrpiKar2joaE91ytDsJddDqWRdQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> wrote:
> I get the reported result (DELETE 0 and a table containing 2 and 3)
> in both 'read committed' and 'read uncommitted'.
Practically speaking those are a single transaction isolation mode.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/transaction-iso.html
I think Merlin has mis-read the article he linked to. The example
being used there never claims to be done under serialization and seems
to describe an example of the perils of relying on the default
isolation level.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-06-20 19:43:39 | Re: Optional message to user when terminating/cancelling backend |
| Previous Message | Chapman Flack | 2017-06-20 19:22:45 | Re: postgresql transactons not fully isolated |