| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] About upgrading a (tuple?) lock in a rollback'd sub-transaction |
| Date: | 2014-04-11 02:52:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20140411025247.GC5822@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-general |
Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > And it also tells you how to stop it --bibtex iirc
>
> Yeah, it's a caution against a potentially harmful usage anyway. Users
> should not use it at all.
>
> I was just wondering if the description of the behavior, that is,
> potential disappearance of certain locks is complete enough.
You do realize that this is no longer the case in 9.3, right?
I don't see a point in changing old releases' documentation.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2014-04-11 03:40:53 | Re: [GENERAL] About upgrading a (tuple?) lock in a rollback'd sub-transaction |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2014-04-11 00:45:52 | Re: [GENERAL] About upgrading a (tuple?) lock in a rollback'd sub-transaction |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2014-04-11 03:40:53 | Re: [GENERAL] About upgrading a (tuple?) lock in a rollback'd sub-transaction |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2014-04-11 00:45:52 | Re: [GENERAL] About upgrading a (tuple?) lock in a rollback'd sub-transaction |