Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions
Date
Msg-id 495A6976.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
>>> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> If you have a concrete suggestion (= patch) for the documentation,
I'm
> all ears.

I'm still working on section "Serializable Isolation versus True
Serializability", but here are all the changes I can see which precede
it.  Has the review of the SQL specs convinced everyone that this much
is appropriate?

It also seems like the "Data Consistency Checks at the Application
Level" section could use a little more detail.  Since referential
integrity checks are so well understood, and don't work reliably under
snapshot serialization without explicit locks, perhaps that could be
added?

-Kevin



Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jaime Casanova"
Date:
Subject: Re: about truncate
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: about truncate