Re: Another unexpected behaviour - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Shianmiin
Subject Re: Another unexpected behaviour
Date
Msg-id 1311090262217-4612763.post@n5.nabble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Another unexpected behaviour  (Shianmiin <Shianmiin@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Shianmiin wrote:
>
> I thought the Atomic should be at statement level, could anyone tell me
> why PostgreSQL behaves differently?
>

re-state for clarification purpose.

Since SQL is a set language, there is no concept of row order. I thought the
checking should be on a per set operation (i.e. per statement), not per
micro operation basis (e.g. in this case, the order of operations could
result in success/failure). I don't know how strict the standard defines
here and it could be implementation specific. Still wondering why PostgreSQL
does it differently from other major DBMS?

--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Another-unexpected-behaviour-tp4610242p4612763.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: PgWest CFP closes in two weeks
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Building an home computer for best Poker Tracker performance