Re: outer joins and for update

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: outer joins and for update
Date: 2005-11-14 15:32:49
Message-ID: 11392.1131982369@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The point of the comment really is that this is a predicate locking
>> problem.

> I thought you might say that. I'm yet to do much reading on predicate
> locking -- do you think it is an area we will even pursue?

Don't hold your breath ;-) ... AFAICS it's a hard problem and would have
horrid repercussions for performance.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2005-11-14 16:25:00 Re: PostgreSQL Weekly News - November 13 2005
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2005-11-14 15:32:30 Re: Should a plan node's result tuple slot be read-only to caller?