| From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Wizard Brony <wizardbrony(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Repeatable Read Isolation Level "transaction start time" |
| Date: | 2024-09-25 17:44:42 |
| Message-ID: | e9dba83f-0fba-4113-a13a-58aa2a98f092@aklaver.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 9/25/24 10:22 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:28 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
> <mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>> wrote:
>
> It's even looser than that, really: it's the first statement that
> requires an MVCC snapshot.
>
>
> Hm....so why does "SELECT 1;" work as a transaction start marker then,
> as opposed to "SHOW work_mem;", which does not? Do we simply consider
> anything with a SELECT as needing a snapshot?
SELECT some_func();
Where some_func() does something that requires a snapshot.
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2024-09-25 17:50:33 | Re: Repeatable Read Isolation Level "transaction start time" |
| Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2024-09-25 17:22:31 | Re: Repeatable Read Isolation Level "transaction start time" |