| From: | Jon Swinth <jswinth(at)atomicpc(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Read Lock For Foreign Key |
| Date: | 2002-08-13 21:21:50 |
| Message-ID: | 200208132121.g7DLLpM03004@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Thanks for you comment Tom. I don't see how dirty reads have anything to do
with foreign keys. Maybe I don't understand what a dirty read is in this
context.
On Tuesday 13 August 2002 02:15 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jon Swinth <jswinth(at)atomicpc(dot)com> writes:
> > How come having foreign keys take out a read lock on a parent row
> > rather than a write lock is not on the todo list?
>
> It is, although I agree that the language is something other than plain
> English:
>
> * Implement dirty reads and use them in RI triggers
>
> regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cindy | 2002-08-13 21:26:46 | Re: question about upper limit on TEXT size |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-13 21:17:31 | Re: Read Lock For Foreign Key |