From: | David Goodenough <david(dot)goodenough(at)btconnect(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How to speed up Exclusive Locking |
Date: | 2006-12-05 12:11:51 |
Message-ID: | 200612051211.51280.david.goodenough@btconnect.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 12:03, Richard Huxton wrote:
> David Goodenough wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 December 2006 10:57, Bernd Helmle wrote:
> >> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:18:21 +0000, David Goodenough
> >>
> >> <david(dot)goodenough(at)btconnect(dot)com> wrote:
> >>> The statements issued to lock each table is:-
> >>> LOCK TABLE table IN EXCLUSIVE MODE; SELECT 1 FROM table;
> >>
> >> So why selecting '1' for each row after locking the relation before? I
> >> don't know HA-JDBC but this looks really useless. Remove the SELECT and
> >> use the LOCK TABLE command within the transaction which does the sync
> >> for you.
> >
> > I will give it a try.
>
> It could be that the HA-JDBC code expects some selected value back. In
> which case a simple "SELECT 1" should be fine. I have to agree with
> Bernd that selecting all rows and then throwing away the results strikes
> me as particularly a braindead behaviour from the library, presumably it
> makes some sort of sense for locking a limited number of rows.
HA-JDBC only ever locks a whole table. As far as I can see it does not
use the ResultSet (and JDBC large ResultSets are never a good idea), so I
have asked the question on its forum why it is there.
Testing with psql a simple LOCK seems pleasantly fast.
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | A. Kretschmer | 2006-12-05 12:15:39 | Re: Time Stamp auto Field |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2006-12-05 12:03:22 | Re: How to speed up Exclusive Locking |