Re: MVCC snapshot timing
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MVCC snapshot timing |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20131112024609.GG15562@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MVCC snapshot timing (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: MVCC snapshot timing
Re: MVCC snapshot timing |
Список | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 09:27:15PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 08:59:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> 'Statement' might work. > > > OK, updated patch attached. Is "statement" too vague here? SQL > > statement? query? > > "SQL statement" might be a good idea in the first sentence, but > I don't think you need to repeat it in the second. > > What's bothering me about this wording is that you're talking about > statements and then suddenly reference transactions (as being "those > other things messing with your data"). This seems weirdly asymmetric, > since after all you could equally well be the one messing with their > data. Yes, that bugged me too, but then I realized that you only see the changes from a transaction when it completes, not from each statement, e.g. you can never see changes between statements of a multi-statement transaction. I used "SQL statement" in the updated, attached patch. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
Вложения
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: