Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions
Date
Msg-id 22144.1243472118@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to User-facing aspects of serializable transactions  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 20:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * Anything else you want to control should be a GUC, as long as it
>> doesn't affect any correctness properties.

> But that still leaves out another behavior which avoids some of the
> serialization anomalies currently possible, but still does not guarantee
> true serializability (that is: implementation of the paper's technique
> sans predicate locking). Is that behavior useful enough to include?

Hmm, what I gathered was that that's not changing any basic semantic
guarantees (and therefore is okay to control as a GUC).  But I haven't
read the paper so maybe I'm missing something.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mark Wong
Date:
Subject: Re: survey of WAL blocksize changes
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions