On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 07:23:09PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 09:45:00AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > That may be, but the descriptive text and point of the example (which isn't
> > atomicity, but concurrency) doesn't even require the second update command
> > to
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 09:45:00AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 9:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> PG Doc comments form writes:
> > I believe there is a mistake in an example on
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/transaction-iso.html section
> > 13.2
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 9:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> PG Doc comments form writes:
> > I believe there is a mistake in an example on
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/transaction-iso.html section
> > 13.2.1:
> > BEGIN;
> > UPDATE accounts SET balance = balance + 100.00 WHERE acctnum = 12345
PG Doc comments form writes:
> I believe there is a mistake in an example on
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/transaction-iso.html section
> 13.2.1:
> BEGIN;
> UPDATE accounts SET balance = balance + 100.00 WHERE acctnum = 12345;
> UPDATE accounts SET balance = balance - 100.00 WHERE acct
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/transaction-iso.html
Description:
I believe there is a mistake in an example on
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/transaction-iso.html section
13.2.1:
BEGIN;
UPDATE accounts SET bala
