From: | Barry Lind <blind(at)xythos(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeffrey Tenny <jeffrey(dot)tenny(at)comcast(dot)net> |
Cc: | postgres jdbc <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE and ResultSet |
Date: | 2004-01-05 20:11:47 |
Message-ID: | 3FF9C503.90606@xythos.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Jeff,
I don't know if you are trying to support multiple databases or not, but
this behavior does vary across databases. In DB2 for example only the
current row your cursor is on is locked, Oracle will lock all rows that
satisfy the query (even if you never fetch them all).
--Barry
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeffrey Tenny <jeffrey(dot)tenny(at)comcast(dot)net> writes:
>
>>Can I count on this behavior for PostgreSQL? Or will it fail to lock
>>all rows if
>>I have a sufficiently large ResultSet and Connection.setFetchSize() does
>>it's magic?
>
>
> In the current implementation, the backend will only lock those rows
> actually returned to the client. If setFetchSize() causes not all the
> rows to be fetched, you lose ...
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | George Lessmann | 2004-01-05 21:01:16 | Re: odd jdbc driver synchronization issue |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-01-05 17:49:37 | Re: PL/Java issues |