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

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions
Date
Msg-id 4A1D9BC3.EE98.0025.1@wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we should introduce a new value for SET TRANSACTION
ISOLATION
> LEVEL, maybe SNAPSHOT, intermediate between READ COMMITTED and
> SERIALIZABLE.
The standard defines such a level, and calls it REPEATABLE READ. 
Snapshot semantics are more strict than required for that level, which
is something you are allowed to get when you request a given level, so
it seems clear to me that when you request REPEATABLE READ mode, you
should get our current snapshot behavior.  I'm not clear on what the
benefit would be of aliasing that with SNAPSHOT.  If there is a
benefit, fine; if not, why add it?
-Kevin


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: search_path vs extensions