Message-ID: <396E0DC8.D8CDF135@selectacast.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 14:43:20 -0400
From: Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net>
Organization: Xtenit
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: "pgsql-general@hub.org" <pgsql-general@hub.org>,
	"pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org" <pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org>
Subject: Re: select for update not locking properly.
References: <396D2AEA.5D19984A@selectacast.net>
 <28676.963473660@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<396E06AB.7544C109@selectacast.net> <1240.963513335@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Damn, I though having seperate Statement objects was supposed to take
care of that.

Peter can you confirm this?

Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net> writes:
> > OK here is the test program.
> 
> I don't know Java hardly at all, but it looks like you've got ten
> threads in Java all issuing commands through a *single* connection
> to a single backend.  Postgres isn't going to lock those threads
> against each other for you ... it has no idea whatever that the
> sequence of commands it's seeing aren't all from one thread.
> 
> You'd need to have ten separate connections to ten separate backends
> to get the behavior you're expecting.  Try putting the Connection
> objects into the Adder objects and firing them up at Adder creation.
> 
>                         regards, tom lane