Re: "serializable" in comments and names

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Dan Ports" <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "serializable" in comments and names
Date: 2010-09-02 19:13:54
Message-ID: 4C7FB12202000025000350B2@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> +1 for adding parens; we might want to make a function of it
> someday.

Makes sense; will do.

> I don't much like the "XactUses..." aspect of it; that's just
> about meaningless, because almost everything in PG could be said
> to be "used" by a transaction. How about
> IsolationUsesXactSnapshot (versus IsolationUsesStmtSnapshot)?

And IsolationIsSerializable to make that test symmetrical?

Any objections to this plan?

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-09-02 20:13:38 Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-09-02 19:07:40 Re: "serializable" in comments and names