Re: referential Integrity and SHARE locks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Marc Munro <marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com>
Cc: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
Subject: Re: referential Integrity and SHARE locks
Date: 2007-02-07 01:53:34
Message-ID: 26873.1170813214@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Marc Munro <marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com> writes:
> The RI triggers currently fire when a record is updated. Under my
> proposal they would fire in the same way but before the record is locked
> rather than after. Or am I missing your point?

IOW, some other transaction could update or delete the tuple meanwhile?
Doesn't seem very promising.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-02-07 02:34:03 Re: Proposal: TABLE functions
Previous Message Luke Lonergan 2007-02-07 00:53:08 Re: [HACKERS] doxygen.postgresql.org