Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Note that we required that the "provider transaction" have the
> attributes IsXactIsoLevelSerializable and XactReadOnly both being
> true, so we have the mandates that the resultant backend process:
> a) Is in read only mode, and
> b) Is in serializable mode.
If XactReadOnly were a "hard" read only constraint, that argument
might be worth the electrons it's written on. I quote TFM:
: When a transaction is read-only, the following SQL commands are
: disallowed: INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, and COPY FROM if the table they
: would write to is not a temporary table; all CREATE, ALTER, and DROP
: commands; COMMENT, GRANT, REVOKE, TRUNCATE; and EXPLAIN ANALYZE and
: EXECUTE if the command they would execute is among those listed. This is
: a high-level notion of read-only that does not prevent all writes to
: disk.
... and it doesn't prevent the need for a separate XID, either.
Now I think someone was looking into a "hard" read only mode for
use in doing read-only queries against a PITR slave; if that
ever happens it might be adaptable to serve this purpose too.
But we haven't got it today.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
