Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Smith <x(at)xman(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?
Date: 2001-06-18 22:04:14
Message-ID: 8975.992901854@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc pgsql-sql

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...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Smith 2001-06-18 22:23:57 Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?
Previous Message Christopher Smith 2001-06-18 21:57:45 Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Smith 2001-06-18 22:23:57 Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?
Previous Message Christopher Smith 2001-06-18 21:57:45 Re: [SQL] Problems ensuring uniqueness?