| From: | Steve Tucknott <steve(at)retsol(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostGreSQL <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Question on locking |
| Date: | 2004-11-05 07:36:22 |
| Message-ID: | 1099640185.1245.15.camel@retsol1 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
PostGreSQL 7.4.5
If I have the situation where process 1 has selected record1 from table
a for update and then process 2 tries to do the same, am I right in
assuming that process 2 will wait until the first process completes the
transaction (I've looked at Chapter 12 and this is intimated).
How can I detect the lock on process 2? I want to be able to tell the
user that the row is tentatively locked and to allow them to abort the
update attempt. I can't see a 'SET LOCK MODE TO NOT WAIT' style command,
so how do I stop process 2 from waiting?
Is the suggested route to interrogate the system tables prior to
selecting for update, to see if a lock has been applied?
Normally we wait on locks , so this is not an issue.
Regards,
Steve Tucknott
ReTSol Ltd
DDI: 01903 828769
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | M. Bastin | 2004-11-05 08:54:46 | Re: Question on locking |
| Previous Message | John-Paul Delaney | 2004-11-05 05:36:36 | Re: pg_ [dump & restore] invalid archive problem |