Received: from localhost (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.182])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26EB9FA23F
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  1 Dec 2006 13:35:28 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 52127-02 for
	<pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  1 Dec 2006 13:35:23 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 717199FA231
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  1 Dec 2006 13:35:23 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kB1HZGxt028703;
	Fri, 1 Dec 2006 12:35:16 -0500 (EST)
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>,
	Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>,
	Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks 
In-reply-to: <1164994477.29643.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> 
References: <1144.1164924373@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1164962544.3778.847.camel@silverbirch.site>
	<20061201113711.GC30441@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<15834.1164985926@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<45705E9C.2060003@enterprisedb.com>
	<24606.1164993538@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1164994477.29643.33.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Comments: In-reply-to "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
	message dated "Fri, 01 Dec 2006 09:34:37 -0800"
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:35:16 -0500
Message-ID: <28702.1164994516@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200612/24
X-Sequence-Number: 94505

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> At what point is the exclusive lock released? When I create a new
> savepoint? On COMMIT of the entire transaction?

COMMIT, or rollback to a savepoint before the original shared lock
was taken.

			regards, tom lane