Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-31 Thread goudvis
Kevin Grittner wrote: > > Actually, since we (mostly you) found explanations for all the > disallowed phenomena, with no PostgreSQL anomalies showing when > using the corrected test code, I was going to call it done. Well, > except that I think some of your tests are interesting enough to ask >

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-28 Thread Kevin Grittner
goudvis wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> >> I would be curious to see (updated, corrected) results on older >> versions. > > If I am correct, Kevin Grittner is writing a review of the code > and the testing methods. I think it would be wise to wait for the > outcome of this. Afterwards, I could po

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-28 Thread goudvis
Robert Haas wrote: > > I would be curious to see (updated, corrected) results on older versions. > If I am correct, Kevin Grittner is writing a review of the code and the testing methods. I think it would be wise to wait for the outcome of this. Afterwards, I could post the code and the executi

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:02 PM, goudvis wrote: > A few updates from my side: > Kevin helped me find two bugs in my test suite. The first: the test suite > had a syntax error in setting the isolation level, which resulted in not > setting an isolation level at all. Secondly, I made a mistake in th

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-27 Thread goudvis
A few updates from my side: Kevin helped me find two bugs in my test suite. The first: the test suite had a syntax error in setting the isolation level, which resulted in not setting an isolation level at all. Secondly, I made a mistake in the phantom detection code, which resulted in detecting pha

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-26 Thread goudvis
ps. Tomorrow I will discuss my approach with my supervisor. In case of a wrong approach or mistake, I'll post it. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/BUG-6269-Anomaly-detection-tp4936233p4940716.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - bugs mailing list archive at Nabb

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-26 Thread goudvis
I executed the tests on PostgreSQL 9.1.1. The only result not expected was phantoms in the serializable isolation level. All other results were as expected. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/BUG-6269-Anomaly-detection-tp4936233p4940614.html Sent from the Pos

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-26 Thread Kevin Grittner
goudvis wrote: > The report is based on a java application that can be found here: > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19316575/dbtp.zip. This zip-file also > includes an SQL file that creates the used tables and the queries > that are executed. > > I put a README-file in the zip with installation instruct

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-26 Thread goudvis
The report is based on a java application that can be found here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19316575/dbtp.zip. This zip-file also includes an SQL file that creates the used tables and the queries that are executed. I put a README-file in the zip with installation instructions. Most easy to do the te

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Paul Stapersma wrote: > PostgreSQL version: 8.3.3 > For a project at my University, we compared PostgreSQL with MySQL's InnoDB. > In this research, we found several cases in which anomalies where detected > in Isolation levels that guaranteed not to have these a

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-25 Thread Kevin Grittner
"Paul Stapersma" wrote: > PostgreSQL version: 8.3.3 > A full report on our findings can be found here: > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19316575/report.pdf I would like to independently run your tests, but I don't see anything in the paper to describe the table(s) used or how they were populated.

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-25 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 25.10.2011 12:51, Paul Stapersma wrote: PostgreSQL version: 8.3.3 That is a pretty old version. At least you should use the latest version in the 8.3 series, which is currently 8.3.16. I'm not sure if there's been any isolation-related bug fixes since 8.3.3, but I don't see any reason not

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-25 Thread Tom Lane
"Paul Stapersma" writes: > For a project at my University, we compared PostgreSQL with MySQL's InnoDB. > In this research, we found several cases in which anomalies where detected > in Isolation levels that guaranteed not to have these anomalies. > In short summary: > - we detected non-repeatable

[BUGS] BUG #6269: Anomaly detection

2011-10-25 Thread Paul Stapersma
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 6269 Logged by: Paul Stapersma Email address: paul.staper...@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 8.3.3 Operating system: Mac OS X Version 10.6.8 Description:Anomaly detection Details: Dear reader, For a project at