Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:25:12 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>,
 "pgsql-docs@postgresql.org" <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Add a new table for Transaction Isolation?
Message-ID: <20150428222512.GC31727@momjian.us>
References: <20150425200255.GD17791@momjian.us>
 <279680020.4245099.1429994867712.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKFQuwaOJ3bGs-ZmxXVsjkVCJLRJhiBpfBYic7rcbd6cPuDHCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKFQuwZ6-FSjmVjtL0ZU1Bq26Bm4TP+Zve5P1AqT_h=jt+uT5w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKFQuwZ6-FSjmVjtL0ZU1Bq26Bm4TP+Zve5P1AqT_h=jt+uT5w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 02:54:00PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>     Paraphrasing here...
> 
>     Table # presents the postgresql implementation of the sql standard
>     isolation levels and notes the additional impermissible behaviors by
>     including "(contra-SQL)" in the cell.  "Contrary to the SQL standard" - the
>     imprecision in the term seems acceptable.
> 
>     Not Possible (contra-SQL)
> 
> 
>   I'd also consider a 5th column to denote whether a serialization failure is
> possible in the first place and then the monitor column would distinguish
> between repeatable read and serializable.

I think the showing a serialization failure column is too much to add to
the table.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


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