Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070901020923l46b534e2l9d4e84293ef11521@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Not sure about "most".  Referential integrity is a pretty common use
> case, and it is not covered without explicit locking.  Many other
> common use cases are not, either.  I agree many are, and that the rest
> can be worked around easily enough that I wouldn't want to see
> blocking introduced to the degree that non-MVCC databases use for
> serializable access.

What do you mean by referential integrity?  I don't believe you can
construct a foreign key problem at any transaction isolation level.

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Custom PGC_POSTMASTER GUC variables ... feasible?