Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-Wzne1fr47aayESfDdfMvjiB+jSfW+xEWggdZuRYa8CL8Nw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation (Kyle Kingsbury <aphyr@jepsen.io>) |
Ответы |
Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 8:37 PM Kyle Kingsbury <aphyr@jepsen.io> wrote: > This looks so weird that I assume I've *got* to be doing it wrong, but trawling > through the source code and pcap trace, I can't see where the mistake is. Maybe > I'll have fresher eyes in the morning. :) READ COMMITTED starts each command within a transaction with its own snapshot, much like Oracle: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/transaction-iso.html There cannot be serialization errors with READ COMMITTED mode, and in general it is a lot more permissive. Probably to the point where it isn't sensible to test with Jepsen at all. It would make sense for you to test REPEATABLE READ isolation level separately, though. It implements snapshot isolation without the added overhead of the mechanisms that prevent (or are supposed to prevent) serialization anomalies. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: