"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes:
>> What do you mean by referential integrity? I don't believe you can
>> construct a foreign key problem at any transaction isolation level.
> I mean that if someone attempts to maintain referential integrity with
> SQL code, without using explicit locks, it is not reliable.
> Presumably the implementation of foreign keys in PostgreSQL takes this
> into account and blocks the kind of behavior shown below. This
> behavior would not occur with true serializable transactions.
IIRC the RI code has to fudge the normal serializable-snapshot behavior
in order to guarantee no constraint violation --- it has to be aware of
concurrent changes that would otherwise be invisible to a serializable
transaction.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
