From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Hashem Masoud <u_z_9@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: "that" missing in "12.2. Transaction Isolation"
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:48:08 -0500
Message-ID: <9900.1107233288@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050130192625.75218.qmail@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050130192625.75218.qmail@web30004.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Hashem Masoud <u_z_9@yahoo.com> writes:
> I don't know if this is the right place for this, but
> the documentation of Postgresql 8.1Devel has a
> statement
> in the section "12.2. Transaction Isolation" that is
> lacking "that":
> Since the cost of redoing complex transactions may be
> significant, this mode is recommended only when
> updating transactions contain logic sufficiently
> complex that they may give wrong answers in Read
> Committed mode.
I'm confused --- that seems like perfectly OK English grammar to me.
What change are you suggesting exactly?
regards, tom lane
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: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, u_z_9@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: "that" missing in "12.2. Transaction Isolation"
In-Reply-To: <9900.1107233288@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox