From: | AK <alkuzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Should we improve documentation on isolation levels? |
Date: | 2013-11-27 19:37:12 |
Message-ID: | 1385581032578-5780629.post@n5.nabble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I am not sure if i am posting in the right place - correct me if I am wrong.
The following is not precise:
13.2.1. Read Committed Isolation Level
"Also note that two successive SELECT commands can see different data, even
though they are within a single transaction, if other transactions commit
changes during execution of the first SELECT."
I think it should be re-worded as follows
"Also note that two successive SELECT commands can see different data, even
though they are within a single transaction, if other transactions commit
after the first SELECT starts, and before the second SELECT starts."
The reason: there could be other DML running between these two SELECTs.
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Should-we-improve-documentation-on-isolation-levels-tp5780629.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-11-27 19:38:23 | Re: doPickSplit stack buffer overflow in XLogInsert? |
Previous Message | David Fetter | 2013-11-27 19:24:09 | Re: Status of FDW pushdowns |