From: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Any idea for serializing INSERTING SERIAL column? |
Date: | 2011-06-01 01:48:51 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTinMqeZzgrqmCf4wF1dMjU42+rf98A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
[snip]
> In summary,
>
> 1) "LOCK table foo" cannot be used because of conflict with autovacuum
> 2) "LOCK sequence" just doesn't work
> 3) "SELECT 1 FROM LOCK sequece" fails after XID wraparound
>
> If you have other idea to serialize concurrent INSERT to a table, I
> would like to hear from you.
Sorry, I'm not real familiar with pgpool, but have you thought about
using an advisory lock on the target table, instead of a "real" lock
(SELECT ... FOR UPDATE / LOCK table)? An advisory lock should not
interfere with autovacuum. Obviously, this would only work if all the
INSERTs in your example were coming from a single application (i.e.
pgpool) which would honor the advisory lock.
Josh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2011-06-01 02:52:58 | Re: Any idea for serializing INSERTING SERIAL column? |
Previous Message | David Fetter | 2011-06-01 01:42:08 | Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID |