Re: Stupid question on Read Committed Isolation Level

From: "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Stupid question on Read Committed Isolation Level
Date: 2004-01-29 18:04:04
Message-ID: 20040129180404.GE43961@xs4all.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 06:54:21PM +0100, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:33:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > What happens if I abort on the first transaction? If I'm reading this

AFAICS the part about not having inconsistencies refers only to the
spectre of 'balance' being changed between its two conceptual accesses
in "SET balance = balance + 100.00". The risk that remains is that the
two updates could see a combined state of the two relevant rows that may
never have existed at the same time--which doesn't matter for this simple
example.

This is explained in the text, but it remains a little murky IMHO.

Jeroen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-01-29 18:06:59 Re: Stupid question on Read Committed Isolation Level
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2004-01-29 18:02:12 Re: msg translation into sk_SK, Docs: SGML -> XML