Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions

>>> I wrote: 
>>>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: 
>> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>>>> "is a natural consequence of the fact" --- There is nothing
>>>> natural about any of this.  Why is it a consequence and how?
>>>  
>>> How could you possibly get any of those phenomena if there are no
>>> concurrent transactions?
>> 
>> I see what you mean now, but you could write out that logic in more
>> detail.
>  
> Those weren't my words; I was quoting the SQL spec.
Last night I was reviewing my proposed patch from this thread, to try
to address other expressed concerns, and noticed that I had used this
language from the SQL spec in the patch.  I see your point now. 
Without the same context as the spec, and when intended for a
different audience, this language probably isn't the best.  It now
also occurs to me that the spec is a copyrighted work, and it probably
isn't appropriate to copy a chunk that big into PostgreSQL docs.
I'll write something in my own words to replace this.
Thanks for the input, and sorry for misunderstanding.
-Kevin