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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1
Date: 2001-03-30 04:16:16
Message-ID: 3AC40890.399F5102@tpf.co.jp (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-sql
Philip Warner wrote:
> 
> At 19:14 29/03/01 -0800, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
> >> >Reported problem is caused by bug (only one tuple version must be
> >> >returned by SELECT) and this is way to fix it.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I assume this is not possible in 7.1?
> >
> >Just looked in heapam.c - I can fix it in two hours.
> >The question is - should we do this now?
> >Comments?
> 
> It's a bug; how confident are you of the fix?
> 

I doubt if it's a bug of SELECT. Well what
'concurrent UPDATE then SELECT FOR UPDATE +
SELECT' return ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: MatthewDate: 2001-03-30 04:56:19
Subject: RE: User administration tool
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2001-03-30 04:02:28
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1

pgsql-sql by date

Next:From: Mikheev, VadimDate: 2001-03-30 05:17:50
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2001-03-30 04:02:28
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: possible row locking bug in 7.0.3 & 7.1

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