Re: Wikipedia's Isolation page
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Wikipedia's Isolation page |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4E7CD6CF.20904@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Wikipedia's Isolation page (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Wikipedia's Isolation page
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On 09/23/2011 11:23 AM, David Fetter wrote: >> I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out what to do about this. >> Should I just do a minor tweak to that section with a reference or >> two to PostgreSQL doc or wiki pages, or does it merit something more >> fundamental? >> > As in a pointer to a new wikipedia page on SSI? > The page Kevin has issues with already points to the section of a Wikipedia page that addresses SSI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot_isolation#Making_Snapshot_Isolation_Serializable I think the right order of operations here is to make sure that's absolutely correct; then return to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_%28database_systems%29#SERIALIZABLE and just rewrite it to note there is a concrete solution available. Maybe something like this: When using non-lock based concurrency control, via an approach such as [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot_isolation#Making_Snapshot_Isolation_Serializable|Serializable snapshot isolation]], no locks are acquired. If the system detects a write collision among several concurrent transactions, only one of them is allowed to commit. See snapshot isolation for more details on this topic. I don't know what other issues Kevin is alluding to, besides this reading as if there are no good solutions around--which the above text should help with. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: