| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | mangoo(at)wpkg(dot)org, scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com, t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp, Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgpool versus sequences |
| Date: | 2011-06-01 22:04:58 |
| Message-ID: | 26909.1306965898@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
>>>> I think the most appropriate solution may be to disallow SELECT FOR
>>>> UPDATE/SHARE on sequences ... so if you have a good reason why we
>>>> shouldn't do so, please explain it.
Attached is a proposed patch to close off this hole. I found that
somebody had already inserted code to forbid the case for foreign
tables, so I just extended that idea a bit (by copying-and-pasting
CheckValidResultRel). Questions:
* Does anyone want to bikeshed on the wording of the error messages?
* Does anyone want to argue for not forbidding SELECT FOR UPDATE on
toast tables?
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| disallow-row-locks-on-non-tables.patch | text/x-patch | 3.7 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-06-01 22:25:43 | Re: pgpool versus sequences |
| Previous Message | Ray Stell | 2011-06-01 17:17:45 | Re: logging how to add timestamp |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-06-01 22:09:09 | Re: SSI predicate locking on heap -- tuple or row? |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2011-06-01 22:02:07 | Re: Another issue with invalid XML values |