Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jenny -" <nat_lazy(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)
Date: 2003-08-05 19:02:10
Message-ID: 11640.1060110130@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Jenny -" <nat_lazy(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
> so even though the application locks a row in a table, table-level locks are
> automatically taken by postgesql ? why is that?

So that the table doesn't disappear while you're trying to scan it. (Or
afterwards --- a row-level lock wouldn't be noticed by DROP TABLE.)

Note that AccessShareLock is a pretty weak kind of lock, and holding it
does not prevent most other operations.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-08-05 19:04:53 Re: TODO: trigger features
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-08-05 18:55:46 Re: logging stuff