From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking |
Date: | 2014-10-10 13:31:52 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQnxY7LxUYzFC8mfDZrufLrCijMA_-wXO1TKHsbkoWn+w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for
SELECT query:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS
However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page
describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a
portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not
mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE. It seems that
this is something rather misleading for the user:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS
Attached is a patch that refactors the whole and improves the documentation:
- Addition of a table showing the conflicts between each lock
- Moved description of each row-level lock mode to the explicit locking page
- Addition of a link in SELECT portion to redirect the user to the
explicit locking page
Regards,
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
20141010_rowlock_doc_refactor.patch | text/x-patch | 12.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | MauMau | 2014-10-10 14:08:34 | Re: [9.4 bug] The database server hangs with write-heavy workload on Windows |
Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2014-10-10 13:18:48 | Re: Column Redaction |