From: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Am I locking more than I need to? |
Date: | 2004-05-21 03:00:05 |
Message-ID: | m31xlecwne.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
The world rejoiced as jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org (Jeff Davis) wrote:
> The problem is, when you add the first item to "cart_items" you have to
> do an INSERT with a quantity of 1, but after that you need to do
> UPDATEs. That would seem to create a potential race condition, so in
> order for that to work it would seem you would need to do an ACCESS
> EXCLUSIVE lock on the table to make sure no other process was reading
> the table at the same time.
Various sorts of race conditions are possible in multi-user
multi-tasking systems; what _actual_ problem are you expecting to have
here?
What I would expect is that putting a unique index onto cart_items
based on (cart_id, prod_id) would prevent getting the confusing
situation of having multiple quantities of a single product in a
single cart.
I imagine that is the best thing to try to prevent, and that is
readily done without any "locks" by adding a UNIQUE constraint. But
perhaps I am imagining a different error condition.
Can you describe the nature of the error condition that you are
thinking about? That may help indicate what foreign key checks and/or
uniqueness constraints might be worth adding.
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="ntlug.org" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://cbbrowne.com/info/internet.html
This login session: only $23.95!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ed L. | 2004-05-21 04:09:01 | reading vacuum verbosity |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2004-05-21 02:19:44 | Am I locking more than I need to? |