Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE performance costs? alternatives?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "D(dot) Dante Lorenso" <dante(at)lorenso(dot)com>
Cc: Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>, Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>, btober(at)ct(dot)metrocast(dot)net, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE performance costs? alternatives?
Date: 2007-08-17 04:14:29
Message-ID: 27902.1187324069@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"D. Dante Lorenso" <dante(at)lorenso(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "D. Dante Lorenso" <dante(at)lorenso(dot)com> writes:
>>> I am calling a stored proc from PHP. Since I do not begin a
>>> transaction, I assume that my call is automatically committed
>>> immediately after invocation.
>>
>> Have you actually verified that, or are you just assuming it?

> Just assuming. I'm not really sure HOW to verify it, though.

Enable query logging on the server and look for BEGIN commands?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Phoenix Kiula 2007-08-17 04:17:33 Re: Strange inconsistency with UPDATE
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-08-17 03:30:18 Re: Strange inconsistency with UPDATE