Re: Compatibility GUC for serializable

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> I'm going to disagree here. For a large, sprawling, legacy application
> changing SERIALIZABLE to REPEATABLE READ in every place in the code
> which might call it can be prohibitively difficult.

What makes you think that would be necessary?  That'd require someone
(a) using serializable, and (b) wanting it to be broken?  I think the
most common reaction would be "thank goodness, this thing actually
works now".

> Further, many such
> applications would be written with workarounds for broken serializable
> behavior, workarounds which would behave unpredictably after an upgrade.

Uh...  you want to support that with an example?  Because my first
reaction is "that's FUD".

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company