public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Simon Riggs <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:40:46 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Actually ... wait a minute. The proposed hack covers the case of
SELECT FOR SHARE followed by SELECT FOR UPDATE within a subtransaction.
But what about SELECT FOR SHARE followed by an actual UPDATE (or DELETE)?
We certainly don't want to mark the UPDATE/DELETE as having been carried
out by the upper transaction, but there's no way we can record the
UPDATE while still remembering the previous share-lock.
So I think I'm back to the position that we should throw an error here.
regards, tom lane
view thread (32+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox