Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
От | Kyle Kingsbury |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16b323b2-dfdb-a4c4-fd9d-7b81e52c2375@jepsen.io обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 6/11/20 1:40 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > What do you think about this documentation update? I think this is really helpful! You can go a little further if you like. Right now, SSI vs serializable and SI vs RR are both described as "differences in behavior", which kinda leaves it unclear as to how those levels are related. If you want to follow Berenson, Adya, et al.'s broad interpretation, I'd say something like "Snapshot isolation prevents some anomalies, like phantoms, which repeatable read allows. It also allows some anomalies, like G2-item (write skew), which repeatable read prevents." ... and if you like, you could follow that with a discussion of how SI, thanks to ambiguity in the ANSI specification, could also be interpreted as stronger than RR. If you stick with the strict interpretation, I'd add a note here about how readers familiar with the SI literature might be confused, and that you're diverging from Berenson et al., but your position is defensible under the spec. "Serializable Snapshot Isolation is stronger than serializability: it allows only serializable histories--and prohibits some additional histories in addition." If you wanna talk about the performance rationale, that's valid too. :) --Kyle
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: