Re: Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking

From: Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking
Date: 2017-02-20 21:38:04
Message-ID: 20170220213804.jny7qdparhz5nd6p@hermes.hilbert.loc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 04:22:51PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

> One other thought here --- if you do want to go with the "no other
> updates" semantics, it still seems like it should be sufficient to
> compare xmins. Comparing the xmax values would add nothing to that,
> except that it would reject if another update had been attempted and
> then failed, which seems undesirable.

Right, we have been doing that (xmin only) in GNUmed for
years in order to detect concurrent updates to our medical
record. Works like a charm.

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ eu.pool.sks-keyservers.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Klaver 2017-02-20 23:33:07 Re: Multiply ON CONFLICT ON CONSTRAINT
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-02-20 21:22:51 Re: Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking