> Not sure about "most". Referential integrity is a pretty common use
> case, and it is not covered without explicit locking. Many other
> common use cases are not, either. I agree many are, and that the rest
> can be worked around easily enough that I wouldn't want to see
> blocking introduced to the degree that non-MVCC databases use for
> serializable access.
What do you mean by referential integrity? I don't believe you can
construct a foreign key problem at any transaction isolation level.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-01-02 17:30:04|
|Subject: Custom PGC_POSTMASTER GUC variables ... feasible?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-01-02 16:01:56|
|Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4? |