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

Re: out-of-order caution

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: out-of-order caution
Date: 2011-10-27 19:40:22
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> (2)  They *can* get a serialization failure involving just two
> transactions: a read and a write.

Only if you ignore the difference between SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE and
plain SELECT.  I think calling the former a "read" is a conceptual error
to start with.  It has the same locking and synchronization behavior as
a write.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: fschmidtDate: 2011-10-27 19:43:06
Subject: portal with hold
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-10-27 19:30:42
Subject: Re: out-of-order caution

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group