Florian Pflug <f...@phlo.org> wrote: > Hm, I think being able to assert that the isolation level really > is SERIALIZABLE by simply doing "SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL > SERIALIZABLE" would be a great feature for SSI. > > Say you've written a trigger which enforces some complex > constraint, but is correct only for SERIALIZABLE transactions. By > simply sticking a "SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE" > at the top of the trigger you'd both document that fact it is > correct only for SERIALIZABLE transactions *and* prevent > corruption should the isolation level be something else due to > a pilot error. Nice, simply and quite effective. It would be great to have a way within a trigger, or possibly other functions, to assert that the transaction isolation level is serializable. What gives me pause here is that the standard allows you to specify a more strict transaction isolation level within a subtransaction without error, so this way of spelling the feature is flirting with rather nonstandard behavior. Is there maybe a better way to check this? -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
