Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <greg(dot)stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions
Date: 2009-05-28 12:43:25
Message-ID: 200905281543.26223.peter_e@gmx.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thursday 28 May 2009 15:24:59 Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I don't think you need that for predicate locking. To determine if e.g
> an INSERT and a SELECT conflict, you need to determine if the INSERTed
> tuple matches the predicate in the SELECT. No need to deduce anything
> between two predicates, but between a tuple and a predicate.

That might the easy part.  The hard part is determining whether a SELECT and 
an UPDATE conflict.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael MeskesDate: 2009-05-28 12:47:23
Subject: Re: Compiler warning cleanup - unitilized constvariables, pointer type mismatch
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2009-05-28 12:29:47
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group