Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I find these responses to be a bit off point. Not everyone can or will
> want to use SERIALIZABLE. The OP's point is that we - particularly
> Tom - have argued in the past that we shouldn't allow this because
> it's too ill-defined and/or confusing. Evidently our competition does
> not agree, and I think that's a point worth noting.
Has anyone looked into what the competition thinks the appropriate
definition is, or whether they all agree on the details?
regards, tom lane
