From: | Sebastien FLAESCH <sf(at)4js(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Guillaume ERGAND <ger(at)4js(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 8.3, libpq and WHERE CURRENT OF |
Date: | 2007-10-28 07:45:16 |
Message-ID: | 47243E0C.1070804@4js.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Just found this in the doc:
"WITH HOLD may not be specified when the query includes FOR UPDATE or FOR SHARE"
Here is what the Informix doc says about WITH HOLD + FOR UPDATE:
"It is possible to declare an update cursor with the WITH HOLD keywords,
but the only reason to do so is to break a long series of updates into
smaller transactions. You must fetch and update a particular row in the
same transaction."
However, I believe Informix keeps the locks set by WITH HOLD + FOR UPDATE
cursors, even if a transaction is terminated... locks are released when
the cursor is closed.
Seb
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> Sebastien FLAESCH wrote:
>> Forget this one, just missing the WITH HOLD option... Must teach
>> myself a bit
>> more before sending further mails. Seb
>
> AFAIK you cannot use "WITH HOLD" together with updateable cursors.
> I might be wrong, though...
>
> regards, Florian Pflug
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-10-28 08:46:32 | Re: Autovacuum cancellation |
Previous Message | Sebastien FLAESCH | 2007-10-28 07:28:19 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.3, libpq and WHERE CURRENT OF |