On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurj...@gmail.com> writes: > > I ran the following query, and got an unexpected negative value. Does > this > > imply that SELECT-transaction was able to see a row created by > > INSERT-transaction which started after the SELECT-transaction? > > Was the SELECT inside a BEGIN block? Oh, I get it. You mean read-committed transaction mode's side-effect inside a transaction block! No, that's not the case. Just confirmed that by issuing a syntactically wrong statement in that session (resulting in ERROR), and then doing 'select 1'; it did not raise the error 'Current transaction is aborted...'. And scrolling back the session does not show any BEGIN/COMMIT/ROLLBACK commands that I would have issued. Regards, -- gurjeet.singh @ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company http://www.EnterpriseDB.com singh.gurj...@{ gmail | yahoo }.com Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device
