From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Lewis <mlewis(at)entrata(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Serializable read only deferrable- implications |
Date: | 2022-03-08 19:56:07 |
Message-ID: | f893f742-7a8c-6cc5-4af6-c67475669ac6@aklaver.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 3/8/22 10:47 AM, Michael Lewis wrote:
> Thanks to you both. If other concurrent sessions are using default
> isolation level of Read committed, would putting long running reports
> (read-only) into that read-only serializable deferrable mode be
> impactful at all?
>
> The documentation says that a transaction ID is only assigned to a
> connection once a write is done, but is the assignment or not of a txn
> id actually impactful on anything? I ask partly because it doesn't seem
> possible to reset that once assigned, through discard all; or something
> else like that which might be used by a connection pooler such as pg
> bouncer. is there any way to check if a session has "done writes/updates
> up to this point"? It seems pg_my_temp_schema() also returns the same
> value even after 'discard temp' or 'discard all' is executed. That was
> surprising to me, but would it be considered an issue by anyone?
I'm not following what you are asking or trying to achieve. For instance
how pg_my_temp_schema() fits into this? You will need to provide a more
complete description of what it is you are doing.
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2022-03-08 20:15:59 | Re: Interesting fail when migrating Pg from Ubuntu Bionic to Focal |
Previous Message | Michael Lewis | 2022-03-08 18:47:21 | Re: Serializable read only deferrable- implications |