On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:58 PM Joshua Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> -Hackers, > > I came across this today [1], " > 3 Results > > In most respects, PostgreSQL behaved as expected: both read uncommitted > and read committed prevent write skew and aborted reads. We observed no > internal consistency violations. However, we have two surprising results to > report. The first is that PostgreSQL’s “repeatable read” is weaker than > repeatable read, at least as defined by Berenson, Adya, Bailis, et al. This > is not necessarily wrong: the ANSI SQL standard is ambiguous. The second > result, which is definitely wrong, is that PostgreSQL’s “serializable” > isolation level isn’t serializable: it allows G2-item during normal > operation. " > > Thanks! > > JD > > 1. https://jepsen.io/analyses/postgresql-12.3 > Yes, this has been reported and is under discussion in pgsql-bugs list: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/db7b729d-0226-d162-a126-8a8ab2dc4443%40jepsen.io
