Re: serializable isolation level behavior question

From: Bob Jones <email_at_me.not>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:17:21 GMT
Message-ID: <Rut_g.18895$6S3.4521@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>

"hpuxrac" <johnbhurley_at_sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:1161453264.610163.195500_at_i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Bob Jones wrote:
>> Please do.
>>
>> > The query was a SELECT in the serializable transaction.
>> >
>>
>> No, session 1 was not set to serializable, but that is not the point
>> anyway.
>
> The session that was doing the selects was serializable. Read the
> original posting.
>
> You are not making any points since you don't understand the original
> posting.
>

Ok, do you think it is going to matter even they were both serializable? Choose any combination, my point is still valid as long as the other guy is doing truncate. Received on Sat Oct 21 2006 - 13:17:21 CDT