On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: >> How about IsXactIsoLevelSnapshot? Just to be a bit shorter. > > I need two macros -- one which has the same definition as the > current IsXactIsoLevelSerializable, to be used everywhere the old > macro name currently is used, which conveys that it is an isolation > level which is based on a transaction snapshot rather than statement > snapshots (i.e., REPEATABLE READ or SERIALIZABLE) and a new macro > (which I was planning to call IsXactIsoLevelFullySerializable) which > conveys that it is the SERIALIZABLE isolation level. Do you feel > that IsXactIsoLevelSnapshot works with > IsXactIsoLevelFullySerializable to convey the right semantics? If > not, what would you suggest?
OK, I see what you were going for. The current definition is: #define IsXactIsoLevelSerializable (XactIsoLevel >= XACT_REPEATABLE_READ) ...which is certainly a bit odd, since you'd think it would be comparing against XACT_SERIALIZABLE given the name. IsXactIsoLevelRepeatableRead()? XactUsesPerXactSnapshot()? Or, inverting the sense of it, XactUsesPerStatementSnapshot()? Just brainstorming... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
