From: | "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: concurrent writes |
Date: | 2003-07-29 11:02:54 |
Message-ID: | 3F26A1B6.13633.5355F14@localhost |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 29 Jul 2003 at 12:48, Andreas Jung wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 12:42, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > On 29 Jul 2003 at 12:33, Andreas Jung wrote:
> > > we are running Postgres 7.3.3 successfully on our portal sites
> > > under Solaris. For a new project we have the requirement that
> > > N processes need to write update/insert within the same time and within
> > > the same transaction data in one table.
> >
> > What does it mean by same transaction data?
>
> should read "update/insert within the same time and within the same
> transaction in one table"
So you want to update same table more than once in a single transaction? That
should work..
> > >More detailed: every process
> > > opens its own connection, starts a transaction, updates *different* rows
> > > and then commits. According to our postgres adminstrator, Postgres seems
> > > to behave differently on Linux and Solaris. Any ideas on that?
> >
> > How it is different? It should be same, right?
>
> Our experience was that the complete table has been locked (Solaris)
> but row-level locking was working with Linux.
Whoa!! That's something. How did you conclude it is locked. If you can produce
some reproducible test case, this would be a big showstopper bug..
Bye
Shridhar
--
flannister, n.: The plastic yoke that holds a six-pack of beer together. --
"Sniglets", Rich Hall & Friends
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas Jung | 2003-07-29 11:07:57 | Re: concurrent writes |
Previous Message | Andreas Jung | 2003-07-29 10:48:35 | Re: concurrent writes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas Jung | 2003-07-29 11:07:57 | Re: concurrent writes |
Previous Message | Andreas Jung | 2003-07-29 10:48:35 | Re: concurrent writes |