X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239EB3A3D30 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:54:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 59127-10 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:54:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA573A3CA7 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:54:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iA5FrtCR026501; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:53:55 -0500 (EST) To: =?iso-8859-2?B?U1rbQ1MgR+Fib3I=?= Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Delayed result from another connection In-reply-to: <011201c4c33b$7bd722c0$0403a8c0@fejleszt4> References: <012601c4c292$6804b810$0403a8c0@fejleszt4> <26896.1099590388@sss.pgh.pa.us> <011201c4c33b$7bd722c0$0403a8c0@fejleszt4> Comments: In-reply-to =?iso-8859-2?B?U1rbQ1MgR+Fib3I=?= message dated "Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:29:30 +0100" Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:53:55 -0500 Message-ID: <26500.1099670035@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200411/47 X-Sequence-Number: 19366 =?iso-8859-2?B?U1rbQ1MgR+Fib3I=?= writes: > From: "Tom Lane" >> Yes, because your transaction is working with a database snapshot that >> predates the other transaction run by the separate PHP connection. > Yes, but the snapshot is not constant during a transaction, right? In pre-8.0 releases, the snapshot only advances between interactive commands, not between commands of a function; so you can't see the results of other transactions that commit after the function starts. regards, tom lane