| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dragan Zubac <zubacdragan(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transaction and table partitioning |
| Date: | 2006-07-03 16:44:08 |
| Message-ID: | 1151945048.2749.561.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 14:59 +0200, Dragan Zubac wrote:
> Is it possible to use transactions with 'per sub table' locks? What I
> mean,if I partition a table and use transaction on that table with
> constraint,will the database lock the master table (and all
> subtables),or only sub table where the data is ?
If you reference only the sub-table then there will be no locks on the
master or other partition tables, assuming you mean to use just DML
rather than DDL. The tables are more loosely coupled than they are in
other RDBMS implementations.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2006-07-03 17:03:40 | Re: Transaction and table partitioning |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-07-03 15:35:16 | Re: Auto selection of internal representation for integer NUMERIC |