Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> wrote:
> Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote:
>> The short explanation is that SIReadLocks on a serializable
>> transaction may need to be kept until overlapping transactions
>> terminate.
>
> The transactions/locks are in separate databases. I would think
> that in most cases that a
> transaction in one database cannot have any effect on a
> transaction in another database.
>
> It would be nice if pg were clever enough to isolate transactions
> within databases.
Good point. That would complicate the logic a bit, but it might be
worth it. I'll make a note to look at that as a potential
enhancement. Thanks!
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
