From: | Mike Castle <dalgoda(at)ix(dot)netcom(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Postgres <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SELECT FOR UPDATE |
Date: | 2001-08-23 15:11:29 |
Message-ID: | 20010823081129.B9288@thune.mrc-home.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 10:09:19AM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
> Oliver Elphick wrote:
> > I can see arguments to support this view, but consider this classic
> > scenario:
> >
> > User1: Read data into an interactive program
> > User1: Start to make changes
> > User2: Read data into an interactive program
> > User2: Start to make changes
> > User1: Save changes
> > User2: Save changes
Consider replacing "Save changes" with:
User1: Lock record, compare original with current record, save if same, unlock
User2: Lock record, compare original with current record, notice difference, abort.
So, yes, 3 buffers: One for original record, one for modified record, one
to hold record for comparison (during lock).
mrc
--
Mike Castle dalgoda(at)ix(dot)netcom(dot)com www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fernando Schapachnik | 2001-08-23 15:16:36 | Views in PgAccess |
Previous Message | Mike Finn | 2001-08-23 15:08:39 | Re: Comparing fixed precision to floating (no anwer) |