Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I think we need a safety net so that the new serializable isolation > code doesn't get upset if we change the base snapshot from under > it, but I haven't looked at that yet. Replacing the snapshot for a serializable transaction after it has acquired its initial snapshot would quietly allow non-serializable behavior, I would think. I don't think that setting a snapshot for a SERIALIZABLE READ ONLY DEFERRABLE transaction makes any sense, since the point of that is that it waits for a snapshot which meets certain criteria to be available; setting a snapshot in that mode should probably just be disallowed. Otherwise, if you set the snapshot before the transaction acquires one through normal means, I can't think of any problems -- just make sure you set FirstSnapshotSet. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
