"Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
> If your query involves foreign scans on two foreign tables on the
> same foreign server, these should always see the same snapshot,
> because that's how it works with two scans in one query on local
That makes sense.
> So I think it should be REPEATABLE READ in all cases -
> SERIALIZABLE is not necessary as long as all you do is read.
That depends on whether you only want to see states of the database
which are consistent with later states of the database and any
invariants enforced by triggers or other software. See this example
of how a read-only transaction can see a bogus state at REPEATABLE
READ or less strict transaction isolation:
Perhaps if the transaction using the pgsql_fdw is running at the
SERIALIZABLE transaction isolation level, it should run the queries
at the that level, otherwise at REPEATABLE READ.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-02-20 15:22:50|
|Subject: Re: Incorrect behaviour when using a GiST index on points |
|Previous:||From: Yeb Havinga||Date: 2012-02-20 14:35:13|
|Subject: Re: [v9.2] Add GUC sepgsql.client_label|