Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.

From: Ed Loehr <eloehr(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com>
To: Rex McMaster <rmcm(at)compsoft(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Joachim Achtzehnter <joachim(at)kraut(dot)bc(dot)ca>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.
Date: 2000-04-26 22:52:44
Message-ID: 3907733C.C6464306@austin.rr.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

rmcm(at)compsoft(dot)com(dot)au wrote:
>
> Doesn't
>
> SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE;
>
> have to come within transaction - ie
>
> BEGIN;
> SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE;
>
> In this order your test seems to behave correctly - only 1 row inserted.

Yes, my initial ordering was in error. But even after reordering, the
point is not that only 1 row was inserted, but rather that Transaction A
was able to see the effects of transaction B when it clearly should not.

Regards,
Ed Loehr

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-04-26 23:04:22 Re: [HACKERS] 7.0 weirdness (maybe solaris?)
Previous Message rmcm 2000-04-26 22:41:55 Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.