| From: | Martin Marques <martin(at)bugs(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Rows with exclusive lock |
| Date: | 2006-07-24 11:28:44 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0607240812500.701@bugs.unl.edu.ar |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Martin Marques escribió:
>>
>> After the SELECT FOR UPDATE other transactions can still see the locked
>> rows. I want a read/write lock, so no one can access does rows.
>
> SELECT FOR UPDATE acquires an exclusive lock, but other transactions
> must try to acquire a lock on the rows as well, or they won't be locked.
> You can try using SELECT FOR SHARE (new as of 8.1) if you want some
> transactions to hold shared (read) locks.
Sorry for not getting it clear the first time.
What I want is something like "LOCK table IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE", but
at row level.
> IOW, SELECT FOR UPDATE blocks other SELECTs FOR UPDATE and SELECTs FOR
> SHARE, but it does not block plain SELECT.
So, this is not posible. :-(
--
21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18
---------------------------------------------------------
Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' ||
Centro de Telemática | '@' || 'unl.edu.ar';
Universidad Nacional | DBA, Programador,
del Litoral | Administrador
---------------------------------------------------------
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mario Splivalo | 2006-07-24 12:12:39 | Primary key constraint violation without error? |
| Previous Message | Richard Jones | 2006-07-24 08:59:07 | Re: Referential integrity (foreign keys) across multiple tables |