Re: Stupid question on Read Committed Isolation Level

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >
> > "If two such transactions concurrently try to change the balance of
> > account 12345, we clearly want the second transaction to start from the
> > updated version of the account's row"
> >
> > To me, I read this as the first transaction has not yet committed, but the
> > second sees its changes ... so if second commitst, and first hasn't yet,
> > second commits with seconds changes + firsts changes, but what if first
> > aborts?
>
> There's the rub--it doesn't say the part about "has not yet committed,"
> although I can see how you could read it that way.

I would say that "two such transactions concurrently" heavily implies
such, no? :)

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664