Re: [HACKERS] It sorta works, but I'm confused about locking

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] It sorta works, but I'm confused about locking
Date: 1998-10-02 01:47:13
Message-ID: 29738.907292833@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I guess I'm not understanding something. How can it ever be correct
>> practice to release a lock before transaction end? For example, if I
>> write some changes in a table, and then release the lock, wouldn't that
>> allow other backends to see the not-yet-committed changes? What if I
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> No. Backend uses xmin/xmax to know is tuple visible or not.

Ah, some light dawns. Thanks for the clue!

> Postgres does this for system tables only.

OK, so what is good coding practice? Always release write lock after
operating on a system table? Or is that only good some of the time,
and if so what's the consideration?

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-10-02 01:48:59 Re: [HACKERS] SQL92
Previous Message Tom Lane 1998-10-02 01:42:01 Re: [HACKERS] Patch for libpgtcl