On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurjeet@gmail.com> writes:
> > I ran the following query, and got an unexpected negative value. Does
> this
> > imply that SELECT-transaction was able to see a row created by
> > INSERT-transaction which started after the SELECT-transaction?
>
> Was the SELECT inside a BEGIN block?
Oh, I get it. You mean read-committed transaction mode's side-effect inside
a transaction block!
No, that's not the case. Just confirmed that by issuing a syntactically
wrong statement in that session (resulting in ERROR), and then doing 'select
1'; it did not raise the error 'Current transaction is aborted...'. And
scrolling back the session does not show any BEGIN/COMMIT/ROLLBACK commands
that I would have issued.
Regards,
--
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet
Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device
