On Wednesday 31 December 2008 02:33:26 Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I'm still working on section "Serializable Isolation versus True
> Serializability", but here are all the changes I can see which precede
> it. Has the review of the SQL specs convinced everyone that this much
> is appropriate?
I don't agree with these changes. You make it sound like serializability is
an additional condition on the serializable isolation level on top of the
no-phantom-reads condition. I think that is not true, both mathematically
and from the wording of the SQL standard. It is an equivalent condition or a
consequence, depending on how you view it.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2009-01-03 22:20:10|
|Subject: Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2009-01-03 21:42:18|
|Subject: Re: posix_fadvise v22|