Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 01:18:25 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, elein <elein@varlena.com>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Adding MERGE to the TODO list (resend with subject)
Message-ID: <20040509051825.GB917@dcc.uchile.cl>
References: <200405082246.i48MkTQ29755@candle.pha.pa.us>
	<409D8E48.3070805@familyhealth.com.au>
	<20040509035405.GA917@dcc.uchile.cl>
	<409DAFEB.7020300@familyhealth.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <409DAFEB.7020300@familyhealth.com.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i

On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 12:13:31PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >I intend to release locks on subtransaction abort, so if the update
> >fails there's room for another transaction to insert the key (which I
> >understand should fail?).  I guess there's a different locking mechanism
> >needed; I believe nested transactions will not be enough.
> 
> Except you can keep trying and trying without the outermost transaction 
> failing.

But that won't provide the necessary next key locking you mentioned in
your first email, will it?

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No necesitamos banderas
No reconocemos fronteras"                  (Jorge González)