On Oct11, 2011, at 23:35 , Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Florian Pflug <f...@phlo.org> wrote: > >> That experience has taught me that backwards compatibility, while very >> important in a lot of cases, has the potential to do just as much harm >> if overdone. > > Agreed. Does my suggestion represent overdoing it? I ask for balance, > not an extreme.
It's my belief that an "off" switch for true serializability is overdoing it, yes. With such a switch, every application that relies on true serializability for correctness would be prone to silent data corruption should the switch ever get set to "off" accidentally. Without such a switch, OTOH, all that will happen are a few more aborts due to serialization errors in application who request SERIALIZABLE when they really only need REPEATABLE READ. Which, in the worst case, is a performance issue, but never an issue of correctness. best regards, Florian Pflug -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
