On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 12:58 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Kevin Grittner > <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > >> I'm not very sure what a clearer explanation would look like > > > > As a stab at it, how about?: > > > > This behavior makes Read Committed mode unsuitable for many UPDATE > > or DELETE commands with joins or subqueries > > I don't think that's any clearer, though it is more disparaging. :-) > > Note we also say: "The partial transaction isolation provided by Read > Committed mode is adequate for many applications, and this mode is > fast and simple to use; however, it is not sufficient for all cases. > Applications that do complex queries and updates might require a more > rigorously consistent view of the database than Read Committed mode > provides."
What is needed here is a layman's context of what isolation modes are good for what type of operation. Neither your explanation or Tom's is particularly useful except to say, "Crap, I might be screwed but I don't know if I am... how do I find out?" Joshua D. Drake > > ...Robert > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering If the world pushes look it in the eye and GRR. Then push back harder. - Salamander -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
