Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 14:15:20 +0000 (UTC)
From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
Reply-To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
 "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>,
 "pgsql-docs@postgresql.org" <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Message-ID: <1416656552.447025.1430316920874.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150428222603.GD31727@momjian.us>
References: <20150428222603.GD31727@momjian.us>
Subject: Re: Add a new table for Transaction Isolation?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 744
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

> I went with "Allowed, but not in PG" for those two fields, and
> removed the extra rows I had added.  You can see the output here:
>
>     http://momjian.us/expire/transaction-iso.html


Looks great!

The only suggestion I can think to make to the table itself is to
make the new column header singular, to match the other columns.
I do think we should define the term used in the new column header;
maybe something like this:


serialization anomaly

    The result of successfully committing a group of transactions
    is inconsistent with all possible orderings of running those
    transactions one at a time.

--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs