public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: PG Doc comments form <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Serializable description seems misleading?
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 21:49:54 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/transaction-iso.html
Description:
Let's say I have two transactions running in Serializable isolation:
T1: Reads a row
T2: Reads the same row
T1: Updates the row
T1: Commits
T2: Commits
You will not get an error on the second commit. These appear to fit the
description of concurrent transactions, and running one before the other
would give different results in the reading of the row by T2, depending on
which transaction was executed first. So how does this square with the docs
that state "it monitors for conditions which could make execution of a
concurrent set of serializable transactions behave in a manner inconsistent
with all possible serial (one at a time) executions".
This seems quite misleading, but I understand there may just be an aspect of
this that I am not understanding.
view thread (2+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Serializable description seems misleading?
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox