Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26455.1230922071@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Ответы |
Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes: >> What do you mean by referential integrity? I don't believe you can >> construct a foreign key problem at any transaction isolation level. > I mean that if someone attempts to maintain referential integrity with > SQL code, without using explicit locks, it is not reliable. > Presumably the implementation of foreign keys in PostgreSQL takes this > into account and blocks the kind of behavior shown below. This > behavior would not occur with true serializable transactions. IIRC the RI code has to fudge the normal serializable-snapshot behavior in order to guarantee no constraint violation --- it has to be aware of concurrent changes that would otherwise be invisible to a serializable transaction. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: