Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu, Jenny - <nat_lazy(at)hotmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)
Date: 2003-07-31 04:20:03
Message-ID: 27673.1059625203@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I was thinking of adding to TODO:
> * Allow shared row locks for referential integrity
> but how is that different from:
> * Implement dirty reads and use them in RI triggers

It'd be a completely different approach to solving the FK locking
problem. I wouldn't think we'd do both.

Personally I'd feel more comfortable with a shared-lock approach, if we
could work out the scalability issues. Dirty reads seem ... well ...
dirty.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-07-31 04:35:21 Re: php with postgres
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-07-31 04:16:27 Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)