Jignesh Shah <jks...@gmail.com> wrote: > The question is should the delete fail if it doesn't exist and > cause a rollback or succeed with DELETE 0 ? I think existing behavior is consistent with both the standard and the other behaviors of PostgreSQL at the READ COMMITTED isolation level. I might have found it surprising at first glance except that there was a recent discussion about why an INSERT on one transaction doesn't stand in the way of a concurrent UPDATE in another transaction at that level. (I don't want to exhibit surprise again so soon -- it might scare Bruce. ;-) ) This example does cause a serialization failure at the REPEATABLE READ level as well as at the SERIALIZABLE level with the SSI patch, which all seems sane to me, too. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
