Subject: Repeatable Read Table Reference

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 20:38:08 +0000

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/transaction-iso.html
Description:

In the documentation for Repeatable Read on this page:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/transaction-iso.html

The documentation says, &quot;This is a stronger guarantee than is required by
the SQL standard for this isolation level, and prevents all of the phenomena
described in Table 13-1.&quot; 

Since the Serialization Anomaly was added to the table in this commit
(https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/23c33198b961f27c80655a7cf439d49ef5a1833d#diff-a85793bf153f1f44870606f9695bc33c),
that statement is no longer true if I understand the documentation
correctly. Here&#39;s a brief patch to tweak that sentence.

diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
index f2272bc..0a112cb 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
@@ -461,10 +461,10 @@ COMMIT;
     even though they are not yet committed.)  This is a stronger
     guarantee than is required by the &lt;acronym&gt;SQL&lt;/acronym&gt; standard
     for this isolation level, and prevents all of the phenomena described
-    in &lt;xref linkend=&quot;mvcc-isolevel-table&quot;&gt;.  As mentioned above, this is
-    specifically allowed by the standard, which only describes the
-    &lt;emphasis&gt;minimum&lt;/emphasis&gt; protections each isolation level must
-    provide.
+    in &lt;xref linkend=&quot;mvcc-isolevel-table&quot;&gt; except for serialization
+    anomalies.  As mentioned above, this is specifically allowed by the
+    standard, which only describes the &lt;emphasis&gt;minimum&lt;/emphasis&gt;
+    protections each isolation level must provide.
    &lt;/para&gt;

    &lt;para&gt;

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

---

From: Kevin Grittner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 11:23:29 -0500

> correctly. Here&#39;s a brief patch to tweak that sentence.

Pushed.  Thanks!

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