Re: PREPARE TRANSACTION and webapps

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PREPARE TRANSACTION and webapps
Date: 2005-11-11 14:13:13
Message-ID: 18081.1131718393@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 05:45:28PM +0800, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
>> Assuming the transactions don't explicitly do any locks ...

> Every transaction takes locks, on every table it accesses. Shared lock,
> but locks anyway. UPDATEs take stronger locks, so any UPDATE may cause
> other queries to wait until you COMMIT or ABORT.

Also, the mere existence of an old open transaction restricts VACUUM's
ability to reclaim dead rows.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vishal saberwal 2005-11-11 14:31:19 Re: replicator
Previous Message Bill Bartlett 2005-11-11 13:49:54 Re: Using native win32 psql.exe using alternative cygwin - psql 8.0.0 beta 3 question