Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593
Date
Msg-id 3552.1231786275@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: 
>> A re-sort after locking doesn't really make things all nice and
>> intuitive either.

> Would it make any sense to roll back and generate a
> SERIALIZATION_FAILURE?

If that's what you want then you run the transaction in serializable
mode.  The point of doing it in READ COMMITTED mode is that you don't
want such a failure.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593
Next
From: Marc Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Status of issue 4593