Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: sad <sad@bankir.ru>
Organization: IT
To: Steve Crawford <scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: locks and triggers. give me an advice please
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 09:01:13 +0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
References: <000001c46ddd$491501d0$c201a8c0@borderveygqj37>
	<200407200936.44292.sad@bankir.ru>
	<200407201130.19676.scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>
In-Reply-To: <200407201130.19676.scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <200407210901.13421.sad@bankir.ru>

thnx.

i try to sound the idea to ensure myself that you are right.

> begin transaction;
> lock t1 in access exclusive mode;
>
> Turn off triggers and do your updates.
> (Note, "truncate t1" is faster than "delete from t1" followed by a
> "vacuum full" and you might consider running "reindex table t1" after
> your mass update or if appropriate drop your indexes, load the data,
> then recreate them.)
>
> Re-establish triggers.
>
> commit; --end of transaction unlocks the table

in case another user inserts a record into an adjuscent table with the valu=
e=20
of reference field NOT IN t1.
the constraint causes reading of t1 to look up FK value IN t1.
so my EXCLUSIVE lock prevents even reading and this user operation will be=
=20
queued.