Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Merlin Moncure
Subject Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated
Date
Msg-id CAHyXU0yEehjmNw99CRNjxw9i6uE0vzmM=MBnbvJhTJzsds2ONQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 2:34 PM, David G. Johnston
<david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net> wrote:
>> I get the reported result (DELETE 0 and a table containing 2 and 3)
>> in both 'read committed' and 'read uncommitted'.
>
> Practically speaking those are a single transaction isolation mode.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/transaction-iso.html
>
> I think Merlin has mis-read the article he linked to.  The example
> being used there never claims to be done under serialization and seems
> to describe an example of the perils of relying on the default
> isolation level.

oops -- could be operator error :-)

merlin



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Something is rotten in publication drop
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Optional message to user when terminating/cancellingbackend