From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Vadim Mikheev" <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL Developers List" <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: [HACKERS] Savepoints... |
Date: | 1999-06-17 04:12:34 |
Message-ID: | 000101beb877$a042bd60$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: root(at)sunpine(dot)krs(dot)ru [mailto:root(at)sunpine(dot)krs(dot)ru]On Behalf Of Vadim
> Mikheev
> Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 12:58 PM
> To: Hiroshi Inoue
> Cc: PostgreSQL Developers List
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Savepoints...
>
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > > - lmgr will remember command id when lock was acquired;
> >
> > Does this mean that many writing commands in a transaction
> > require many command id-s to remember ?
>
> Did you mean such cases:
>
Yes.
> begin;
> ...
> update t set...;
> ...
> update t set...;
> ...
> end;
>
> ?
>
> We'll remember command id for the first "update t" only
> (i.e. for the first ROW EXCLUSIVE mode lock over table t).
>
How to reduce lock counter for ROW EXCLUSIVE mode lock
over table t?
And more questions.
HEAP_MARKED_FOR_UPDATE state could be rollbacked ?
For example
..
[savepoint 1]
select .. from t1 where key=1 for update;
[savepoint 2]
select .. from t1 where key=1 for update;
[savepoint 3]
update t1 set .. where key=1;
Rollback to savepoint 3 OK ?
Rollback to savepoint 2 OK ?
Rollback to savepoint 1 OK ?
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Merrill | 1999-06-17 04:36:00 | Re: UnixWare |
Previous Message | Vadim Mikheev | 1999-06-17 03:58:02 | Re: [HACKERS] Savepoints... |