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

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwZAwL6jQRGMfJZyF-6GrpiKar2joaE91ytDsJddDqWRdQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated
List pgsql-hackers
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.

David J.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Chapman Flack
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postgresql transactons not fully isolated
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Optional message to user when terminating/cancelling backend