On Thu, 2020-11-26 at 23:45 +0100, Jan Behrens wrote:
> I understand that in a read+write scenario, two concurrent transactions may still lead to
> a result that could not have occurred if those two transactions were executed one after the other.
> However, in a read-only case, I do not see how REPEATABLE READ could differ from SERIALIZABLE. Yet [1] explains
that:
There is an example in the Wiki:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SSI#Read_Only_Transactions
In that example, serializability is broken only because of a READ ONLY transaction.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com