Re: Hot Standby (v9d)

On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 20:13 +0000, Greg Stark wrote:
> > If you have a serializable transaction with subtransactions that  
> > suffers
> > a serializability error it only cancels the current subtransaction.
> 
> This is a complete tangent to your work, but I wonder if this is  
> really right. I mean it's not as if we could have srrialized the  
> transaction as a whole with respect to whatever other transaction we  
> failed.

Isn't this back to the discussion about PostgreSQL serializability
versus true serializability?

I agree that's not true serializability.

Regards,Jeff Davis