Re: correction

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 11:49:09PM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> I think that suffers from the same problem: izt sounds like the standard allows
> stricter behavior than PostgreSQL.
> 
> How about:
> 
>   The table also shows that PostgreSQL's Repeatable Read implementation
>   does not allow phantom reads.  That is fine, because the SQL standard only
>   specifies which anomalies must <emphasis>not</enphasis> occur at a certain
>   isolation level.  It is no problem if an implementation provides higher
>   guarantees than required.
>   The behavior of the available isolation levels is detailed in the
>   following subsections.

How is this, attached?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Indecision is a decision.  Inaction is an action.  Mark Batterson