Re: Compatibility GUC for serializable

Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> wrote:
> That Survey's missing one important distinction for that
> discussion.
> 
> Do you take the the current survey answer
> 
>    "Yes, we depend on it for production code"
> 
> to imply
> 
>    "Yes, we depend on actual real SERIALIZABLE transactions in
>     production and will panic if you tell us we're not getting
>     that"
> 
> or
> 
>    "Yes, we depend on the legacy not-quite SERIALIZABLE
>     transactions in production and don't want real serializable
>     transactions"
Yeah, I was reluctant to reply to that survey because we rely on it
to the extent that it works now, but it would not break anything if
we dropped in a real SERIALIZABLE implementation.  I fear that
choosing the "depend on it" answer would imply "don't want changes".
-Kevin