| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | neil(dot)saunders(at)accenture(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transaction Questions |
| Date: | 2005-08-24 16:32:39 |
| Message-ID: | 200508240932.39647.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Neil,
> Thanks Josh. I agree with you that it would be preferable to have a better
> design - But since all 'periods' are constrained based on each other, I can
> see no other way than locking all tables to prevent a race hazard. Any
> ideas you have an any improvment would be gratefully received - I'm quite
> new to database design!
You've chosen a tough problem to start with, then. Calendaring in SQL is a
pain, mostly due to a bunch of bad decisions made by the SQL committee in the
early 90's.
After some thought, there isn't an *easy* way to avoid locking the whole
table. There are some elaborate workarounds, but those are only worth
pursuing if the locking is seriously choking your application.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kretschmer Andreas | 2005-08-24 17:08:04 | Re: SQL problem? |
| Previous Message | cbraden | 2005-08-24 16:22:23 | SQL problem? |