From: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
---|---|
To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ryan VanderBijl <rvbijl-pgsql(at)vanderbijlfamily(dot)com>, PostgresSQL General Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: serialization errors |
Date: | 2003-01-31 16:24:39 |
Message-ID: | 1044030279.8694.94.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 00:40, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2003, Greg Copeland wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 13:00, Ryan VanderBijl wrote:
> > > I guess I'm starting to sound like a broken record here, but I'm struggling
> > > to understand why it should say unique constraint violated instead of serial.
> >
> > Because, the "select max(node_order)+1" will select the identical value
> > in multiple sessions. Done concurrently, it results in unique
> > constraint violation on your insert, even if the inserts are serialized.
>
> I think his argument is that since the two transactions (as a whole)
> should be serialized, he shouldn't get the same max(node_order) in both
> since in either order of serialization of the two transactions you can't
> get 5 from both selects (one should return 6).
Thank you for the followup. If you take a look at the section I quoted,
you'll note that you're not addressing the specific question even though
you are addressing the greater question. ;)
He asked why he was getting a constraint violation rather than a serial
violation. I simply attempted to help illustrate why it makes sense
that it is a unique key constraint violation as he's attempting to
insert the same value twice. As such, the fact that he's attempting to
do so within a pair of serialized transactions doesn't change the fact
that he is still attempting to insert a duplicate value.
Regards,
--
Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net>
Copeland Computer Consulting
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-01-31 16:50:38 | Re: serialization errors |
Previous Message | Don Isgitt | 2003-01-31 16:17:10 | limited field duplicates |