Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
| От | Thomas Munro |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+hUKG+qosU_NBeSpcZUEfFBpG3C3PwKPVZi30tFXrPjg67ejg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:16 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > At first glance it seemed to me that MySQL's repeatable read must be > more or less the same as Postgres' repeatable read; there is only one > snapshot in each case. But it's very different in reality, since > updates and deletes don't use the transaction snapshot. Worst of all, > you can update rows that were not visible to the transaction snapshot, > thus rendering them visible (see the "Note" box in the documentation > for an example of this). InnoDB won't throw a serialization error at > any isolation level. Ugh, obviously I only read the first two paragraphs of that page, which sound an *awful* lot like a description of SI (admittedly without naming it). My excuse is that I arrived on that page by following a link from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot_isolation. Wikipedia is wrong. Thanks for clarifying.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: