Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: "serializable" in comments and names

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Dan Ports" <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "serializable" in comments and names
Date: 2010-09-02 19:13:54
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> +1 for adding parens; we might want to make a function of it
> someday.
Makes sense; will do.
> I don't much like the "XactUses..." aspect of it; that's just
> about meaningless, because almost everything in PG could be said
> to be "used" by a transaction.  How about
> IsolationUsesXactSnapshot (versus IsolationUsesStmtSnapshot)?
And IsolationIsSerializable to make that test symmetrical?
Any objections to this plan?

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-09-02 20:13:38
Subject: Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-09-02 19:07:40
Subject: Re: "serializable" in comments and names

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group