| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: relcache refcount |
| Date: | 2004-05-14 12:02:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20276.1084536178@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
> Why can't we keep all locks until main tx end ?
For committed subtransactions we have to do that, yes, but for aborted
subtransactions we must release. Otherwise you can't implement a retry
loop around a potentially-deadlocking operation.
> (I am assuming that a deadlock will still break the whole tx)
Wrong. We might as well not bother with the entire project.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2004-05-14 13:26:15 | Re: Bogus permissions display in 7.4 |
| Previous Message | pgsql | 2004-05-14 11:35:29 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during |