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

Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?

From: Christopher Smith <x(at)xman(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?
Date: 2001-06-18 22:23:57
Message-ID: 992903037.6594.3.camel@rivest.xdrive.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbcpgsql-sql
On 18 Jun 2001 18:04:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Smith <x(at)xman(dot)org> writes:
> >> Um ... surely that should be "if count > 0" ?  Or was that just a
> >> transcription error?
> >> 
> >> This approach certainly ought to work as desired given the exclusive
> >> lock, so a silly typo seems like a plausible explanation...
> 
> > Sorry, it is indeed a transcription error (sadly).
> 
> Oh well.  The next thought, given that you mention threads, is that
> you've got multiple threads issuing commands to the same backend
> connection; in which case the interlocking you think you have doesn't
> exist at all...

You got it bang on... I thought I had isolated access to the connections
properly, but shortly after posting that last e-mail, had a eureka moment.
I presume this will make the bug go away, so I'll encourage everyone to
ignore this thread (other than as a warning ;-) until I've confirmed I
still have the problem after making the correct adjustments.

--Chris


In response to

pgsql-sql by date

Next:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2001-06-18 22:59:25
Subject: Re: Referential Integrity Question (Delete/Insert during Transaction)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-06-18 22:04:14
Subject: Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Dave CramerDate: 2001-06-19 01:33:38
Subject: Re: JDBC Ant Problem
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-06-18 22:04:14
Subject: Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?

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