Re: [HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2010-02-22 Thread Bruce Momjian
Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Yeah, they basically have semantics specified by the SQL standard that > > are not compatible with anything else in GUC land. They are more like > > SET LOCAL settings, but again not quite. > > Mind you, transaction_isolation and transaction_read_only aren't > documented

Re: [HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2009-10-13 Thread Josh Berkus
> Yeah, they basically have semantics specified by the SQL standard that > are not compatible with anything else in GUC land. They are more like > SET LOCAL settings, but again not quite. Mind you, transaction_isolation and transaction_read_only aren't documented anywhere in our docs *as setting

Re: [HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2009-10-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 22:22 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 22:13 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > However, for *two* settings, and two settings only, we distinguish that > > by naming an identical setting "default_*" in postgresql.conf. This is > > confusing and inconsistent with th

Re: [HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2009-10-12 Thread Josh Berkus
Itagaki-san, > BEGIN; > SET transaction_isolation = 'serializable'; > SET default_transaction_isolation = 'read committed'; > SHOW transaction_isolation; > => serializable > SHOW default_transaction_isolation; > => read committed > COMMIT; > -- next transaction uses default_transaction_iso

Re: [HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2009-10-12 Thread Jeff Davis
On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 22:13 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > However, for *two* settings, and two settings only, we distinguish that > by naming an identical setting "default_*" in postgresql.conf. This is > confusing and inconsistent with the rest of the GUCS. Namely: > > default_transaction_isolati

Re: [HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2009-10-12 Thread Itagaki Takahiro
Josh Berkus wrote: > default_transaction_isolation > default_transaction_read_only They are settings of transaction_isolation and transaction_read_only for *next* transactions, no? > transaction_isolation > transaction_read_only Non-default versions are almost read-only variables because we c

[HACKERS] transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation

2009-10-12 Thread Josh Berkus
Hackers, A slew of settings in postgresql.conf, including work_mem, search_path, DateStyle, and about 80 others are effectively just defaults for new connections, since they can be changed by any user. However, for *two* settings, and two settings only, we distinguish that by naming an identical