Message285295
| Author | Gian-Carlo Pascutto |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Gian-Carlo Pascutto, arigo, benjamin.peterson, berker.peksag, ghaering, larry, lemburg, palaviv, python-dev |
| Date | 2017-01-12.08:36:13 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1484210174.16.0.500428336389.issue29006@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
>Then we wait for someone that really knows why the change was done in the first place. Python 2.7 had a regression compared to 2.6 where a SELECT after a COMMIT would silently return the wrong data: http://bugs.python.org/issue23129 http://bugs.python.org/issue10513 Neither exiting with a locked error nor producing the wrong data are particularly appealing results. Did 2.6 pass those sets that caused the attempted fix to get backed out? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-01-12 08:36:14 | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | set | recipients: + Gian-Carlo Pascutto, lemburg, arigo, ghaering, larry, benjamin.peterson, python-dev, berker.peksag, palaviv |
| 2017-01-12 08:36:14 | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | set | messageid: <1484210174.16.0.500428336389.issue29006@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2017-01-12 08:36:14 | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | link | issue29006 messages |
| 2017-01-12 08:36:13 | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | create | |