| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: MERGE behavior with REPEATABLE READ isolation level |
| Date: | 2026-02-24 09:09:54 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCWb_EhJZRgZVZxhLn328F-VsUUYjkQPrKkVyYiX-2Viow@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 at 03:13, Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> 于2026年2月15日周日 09:23写道：
> >
> > I found it strange that ExecMergeMatched() checks for IsolationUsesXactSnapshot() in the TM_Deleted case, but not in the TM_Updated case.
>
> I tried "update test set val = val + 100;" but the SQL reported a
> "could not serialize access due to concurrent update" error.
> It seems that the MERGE command should behave identically to UPDATE
> when performing a match action.
>
Yes, I agree. I think this is a bug (probably just an oversight in the
original MERGE commit).
Regards,
Dean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2026-02-24 09:42:06 | pgsql: Allow ALTER COLUMN SET EXPRESSION on virtual columns with CHECK |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2026-02-24 08:45:48 | Re: More speedups for tuple deformation |