Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Forest Wilkinson <fspam(at)home(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1
Date: 2001-03-28 06:11:08
Message-ID: 17070.985759868@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

Forest Wilkinson <fspam(at)home(dot)com> writes:
> If I remember correctly, UPDATE establishes a lock on the affected rows,
> which will block another UPDATE on the same rows for the duration of the
> transaction. If that's true, shouldn't I be able to achieve my desired
> behavior by removing the initial as follows:

> create function nextid( varchar(32)) returns int8 as '
> update idseq set id = id + 1 where name = $1::text;
> select id from idseq where name = $1::text;
> ' language 'sql';

> Or, would I still have to add FOR UPDATE to that final SELECT?

You're right, the initial SELECT FOR UPDATE is a waste of cycles
considering that you're not using the value it returns. But you'll
still need the last select to be FOR UPDATE so that it plays by the
same rules as the UPDATE does.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2001-03-28 06:11:59 Re: Re: Call for platforms
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-03-28 06:08:45 Re: Re: Call for platforms

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2001-03-28 06:19:05 Re: [HACKERS] Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1
Previous Message Forest Wilkinson 2001-03-28 06:08:00 Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1