Am Dienstag, 16. Oktober 2007 schrieb Nico Sabbi: > to me the above sentence sounds inconsistent: it's asserting that both > 1) and 2) apply: > > 1) it never sees ... changes committed during query execution by > concurrent transactions What this is supposed to mean is that you don't see changes while your own query runs. > > 2) Notice that two successive SELECT commands can see different data, > even though they > are within a single transaction, if other transactions commit changes > during execution > of the first SELECT -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
