From: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Saleem Burhani Baloch <peseek(at)khi(dot)wol(dot)net(dot)pk>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow response of PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2004-02-18 02:21:31 |
Message-ID: | 4032CC2B.9030208@potentialtech.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
scott.marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
>>>>>1- How can I lock a single record so that other users can only read
>>>>>it. ??
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You cannot do that in PostgreSQL.
>>>
>>>
>>>How about SELECT ... FOR UPDATE?
>>
>>No, because users cannot read the locked row in that case.
>
> I just tested it (within transactions) and it appeared that I could still
> view the rows selected for update.
Thank you. I was just about to test it myself.
The user's guide, section 9.3.2 states that this is the case: i.e. select
for update will prevent concurrent updating of the row, while allowing
queries utilizing that row to succeed.
--
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-02-18 04:52:55 | Re: Slow response of PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2004-02-18 01:50:08 | Re: Slow response of PostgreSQL |