Re: lock table question

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Andy Kriger" <akriger(at)greaterthanone(dot)com>
Cc: "Pgsql-General" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: lock table question
Date: 2002-12-30 21:17:08
Message-ID: 23095.1041283028@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Andy Kriger" <akriger(at)greaterthanone(dot)com> writes:
> It doesn't lock the row from being read. I want to make sure the row cannot
> be read until I have done my read and updated if necessary.

Why?

You're really swimming upstream against the notion of MVCC if you want
to prevent pure readers from proceeding while your update transaction
runs. Since you claim to be concerned about bottlenecks, I do not see
why you shouldn't embrace the MVCC worldview, rather than fighting it
tooth and nail.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Koizar 2002-12-30 21:30:05 Re: lock table question
Previous Message Andy Kriger 2002-12-30 20:48:38 Re: lock table question