From: | "Michel SALAIS" <msalais(at)msym(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | "'Simon Riggs'" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "'Yambu'" <hyambu(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Pgsql-admin'" <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: select locks table for updates |
Date: | 2020-11-19 22:31:59 |
Message-ID: | 003601d6bec3$cc0db980$64292c80$@msym.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
I think the original question wasn't about what can be done. Any way that is how I considered it. A simple question, a simple reply taking into account default behavior only. The point was just to say that things don't go the same everywhere...
Michel SALAIS
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Envoyé : jeudi 19 novembre 2020 22:14
À : Michel SALAIS <msalais(at)msym(dot)fr>
Cc : Yambu <hyambu(at)gmail(dot)com>; Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Objet : Re: select locks table for updates
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 at 10:20, Michel SALAIS <msalais(at)msym(dot)fr> wrote:
>
> No! Not in PostgreSQL.
In normal SELECTs, that is correct.
If you use SELECT ... FOR UPDATE then rows will be locked.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sachin Kumar | 2020-11-22 16:45:47 | PG Admin 4.28 is crashing while viewing 10M row data |
Previous Message | Yambu | 2020-11-19 21:14:17 | Re: Logical replication |