From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Childs <blue(dot)dragon(at)blueyonder(dot)co(dot)uk>, PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Replaceing records |
Date: | 2003-09-05 14:52:34 |
Message-ID: | 14444.1062773554@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> writes:
> Thinking about it, there's probably no easy way to avoid race conditions
> (in a true transactional DB at least) when inserting into a table with
> unique constraints. The REPLACE syntax will definitely not do it,
> because I can't imagine what it should do when 2 threads try to REPLACE
> the same key in concurrent transactions. Both will see the key as
> missing, and try to insert it, so back we are at the same problem INSERT
> has.
Assuming that you've got a unique constraint defined, one thread will
succeed in doing the INSERT, and the other will fail with a duplicate
key error --- whereupon it should loop back and try the REPLACE part
again. So what this all comes down to is having control over recovery
from a dup-key error. You have to be able to not have that abort your
whole transaction.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lincoln Yeoh | 2003-09-05 15:16:27 | Re: default EXECUTE privilege |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-05 14:48:29 | Re: default EXECUTE privilege |