Re: How to mark a transaction as SERIALIZABLE?
От | Chris Browne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How to mark a transaction as SERIALIZABLE? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87d3qnu752.fsf@cbbrowne.afilias-int.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | How to mark a transaction as SERIALIZABLE? (Joe Carr <joe.carr@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
joe.carr@gmail.com (Joe Carr) writes: > so that select is executed prior to the SET TRANSACTION. If I remove the SET > TRANSACTION command from the function, and then call it by : > > SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE; > select * from test('test'); > > that works. So, is that the correct way to set the isolation level for a > function? Thanks again for your help. In effect, it's an illusion that you "set the isolation level for a function." Functions run in the pre-existing context of an existing transaction. (Yes, "existing" is pretty redundant there :-).) You already set the isolation level for the transaction - the function just uses the isolation already defined. If a function expects a particular isolation level, one could mandate this by checking the isolation level in the function, and raising an error if it doesn't meet up with expectations. The Postgres TODO list has an item, "Implement stored procedures" where the work suggested indicates: "This might involve the control of transaction state and the return of multiple result sets" That control of transaction state is what you're trying to do; it's not done, so that functionality doesn't exist at this time. -- wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','gmail.com'). http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/postgresql.html "If you give a man a fish, he will eat for a day. If you teach him how to fish, he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day."
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: