From: | Marsh Ray <marsh5143(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Commit visibility guarantees |
Date: | 2009-05-18 23:44:36 |
Message-ID: | 2afbdd3f0905181644m655adb6as42e1391c412b2479@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Marsh Ray <marsh5143(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> The central question: So if I successfully commit an update
>> transaction on one connection, then instantaneously issue a select on
>> another previously-opened connection, under what circumstances am I
>> guaranteed that the select will see the effects of the update?
>
> If the select is using a snapshot taken later than the commit, it will
> see the effects of the update.
Great! Just the kind of definitive answer I was looking for.
Now I just need to find a comprehensive list of all the things that
could cause an older snapshot to be retained, and ensure that none of
them could possibly be occurring on this connection.
This is a connection kept open for extended periods, and used
mutithreadedly for selects only. Do you suppose a long-running
concurrent select on another thread could be holding back the snapshot
for the whole connection? Hmm...
- Marsh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-05-18 23:49:26 | Re: array/function question |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-05-18 23:20:15 | Re: Commit visibility guarantees |