Re: OIDs, CTIDs, updateable cursors and friends

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "Shachar Shemesh" <psql(at)shemesh(dot)biz>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "PostgreSQL OLE DB development" <oledb-dev(at)gborg(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OIDs, CTIDs, updateable cursors and friends
Date: 2004-02-19 15:09:44
Message-ID: 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184CFDB@m0114.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> I believe the ODBC driver uses CTID for this sort of problem. CTID is
> guaranteed to exist and to be fast to access (since it's a physical
> locator). Against this you have the problem that concurrent updates
> of the record will move it, leaving your CTID invalid. However, that

IIRC the ctid access follows the chain up to the currently valid
tuple ? I thought the only enemy of ctid access was "vacuum" ?

Andreas

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD 2004-02-19 15:33:34 Re: [PATCHES] NO WAIT ...
Previous Message Thomas Hallgren 2004-02-19 14:49:47 Re: Advice regarding configuration parameters