| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu |
| Subject: | Re: SSI predicate locking on heap -- tuple or row? |
| Date: | 2011-05-22 00:36:17 |
| Message-ID: | BANLkTi=vG-ZfLDtGbekRvrCgr85YDdXVyg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> [Anyone who has followed along this far has earned my undying
> gratitude.]
>
> Since the chain of transactions has to overlap T0 and T3, I don't see
> how that can happen. We established that T0 has to commit before T3 can
> start, so the chain will ultimately have to get to that T0 commit.
>
> I don't want to start ripping out the apparently useless code without
> someone checking my logic here. One big gaff in this area is quite
> enough for me. :-/ Anyone?
How is an UPDATE different from a DELETE and an INSERT?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-05-22 00:36:42 | Re: eviscerating the parser |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-05-22 00:36:04 | Re: eviscerating the parser |