In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Joshua D. Drake") transmitted: > PostgreSQL does not support read uncommited and repeatable read > isolation levels? If that is so... then PostgreSQL is NOT ACID > compliant?
Are you certain that the source of the information was actually credible? If you need "repeatable read," then that means doing it in a transaction scope with SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE. On that side of things, the information source is presumably Downright Wrong. As for "read uncommitted," that's taboo to ACID. After all, reading uncommitted data means depending on facts that might well _evaporate_. You don't WANT "dirty reads." In an Internet registry, for instance, that would mean that someone might consult WHOIS and get address information for a half-baked record that, due to a lack of funds on the part of a fly-by-night registrar, never did get committed. That's WRONG. Or that a payroll run might pick up phantom employees that someone _considered_ hiring, but never finished the paperwork on. Again, that's WRONG behaviour. What kind of fool wants to get WRONG information that hasn't been committed? (It's a given that they are a fool; the question is what kind of fool...) -- wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('aa454','freenet.carleton.ca'). http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lisp.html Rules of the Evil Overlord #17. "When I employ people as advisors, I will occasionally listen to their advice." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster