| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu, Jenny - <nat_lazy(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: this is in plain text (row level locks) |
| Date: | 2003-07-24 05:28:09 |
| Message-ID: | 15638.1059024489@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I suppose we could allow one backend to mark the page with a shared lock
> for primary key purposes while others read it. Does that buy us
> anything?
That doesn't work, unless you insist that the first backend can't exit
its transaction until all the other ones are done. Which introduces its
own possibilities for deadlock --- but even worse, how does the first
backend *know* that the other ones are done? You're right back where
you started: it has to be possible to tell which backends have
share-locked a particular row.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sailesh Krishnamurthy | 2003-07-24 06:45:39 | Re: this is in plain text (row level locks) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-07-24 05:21:53 | Re: this is in plain text (row level locks) |