| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Date: | 2013-09-23 23:16:59 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTN=+jkqUgb-GbVYLqqEQ9SPW6eC_8ix2kqxvwtN+y-1w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> and you cannot throw a serialization failure at read committed.
>
> Not sure that's true, but at least it might not be the most desirable behavior.
I'm pretty sure that that's totally true. "You don't have to worry
about serialization failures at read committed, except when you do"
seems kind of weak to me. Especially since none of the usual suspects
say the same thing. That said, it sure would be convenient if it
wasn't true!
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-09-24 01:21:53 | Re: record identical operator |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-09-23 23:05:45 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |