Re: Static snapshot data
От
Manfred Koizar
Тема
Re: Static snapshot data
Дата
Msg-id
v8srcv0dmiaslo6ieeuhqcfdupoqkjoehk@4ax.com
Ответ на
Re: Static snapshot data (Alvaro Herrera)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: Static snapshot data Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Static snapshot data Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
Re: Static snapshot data Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Static snapshot data Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
On Sat, 17 May 2003 19:14:25 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> >The user can >> >change from READ COMMITTED to SERIALIZABLE when starting a >> >subtransaction, but not the other way around. >> >> You cannot propose this and agree to my three rules at the same time. >> Rule 3 says that these two sequences of commands are equivalent: >> [example] > >I see. Then I don't fully agree with your rules. Let's say I find that >the rules are very good guidelines, but they fail WRT the isolation >level, which is a special exception. If there is not a compelling reason for making things more complicated, I vote for implementing the most simple usable solution, i.e. the whole transaction tree has to run with the same isolation level. If SERIALIZABLE subtransactions in a READ COMMITTED transaction are a useful feature, this enhancement can be added later without breaking compatibility. BTW, do we have to invent a new syntax for starting and ending subtransactions? COMMIT/ROLLBACK should be no problem. But does BEGIN [subtransaction] conflict with BEGIN ... END in pl/pgslq? ServusManfred
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления