Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
postgresql.verite.pro | ||
| | | | |
martin.kleppmann.com
|
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
pavan-kalyan.dev
|
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
johnjr.dev
|
|
| | | | | When we study transactions in relational databases, one of the first things we learn are the guarantees that a transaction must provide. ACID(Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) are the properties that we desire. Here, I will discuss the Isolation level in more detail and show that atomicity alone is not enough when handling concurrency. One classic example of the importance of atomicity is moving money between accounts. So, imagine that we have two accounts and we would like to transfer the total amount from one account to another one. In a relational database, what we need to do is three steps: | |
| | | | |
sookocheff.com
|
|
| | | Title and Author of Paper Generalized Isolation Level Definitions, Adya et al. Summary The ANSI SQL standard defines isolation levels allowing database users to trade off between performance and consistency when running transactions. Unfortunately, the wording in the SQL standard is geared towards locking as the sole supported concurrency method. This paper presents alternative definitions to the isolation levels specified in the ANSI SQL standard that are general enough to allow for any concurrency method (multi-version, optimistic, etc.) to be used. | ||
