Re: table as log (multiple writers and readers)

From: "David Wilson" <david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Joris Dobbelsteen" <joris(at)familiedobbelsteen(dot)nl>
Cc: "Vance Maverick" <vmaverick(at)pgp(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: table as log (multiple writers and readers)
Date: 2008-04-22 18:59:09
Message-ID: e7f9235d0804221159w10b50de1y9b1d87181249c9aa@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Joris Dobbelsteen
<joris(at)familiedobbelsteen(dot)nl> wrote:
>
> Ah, yes, all visible rows...
> My point is that, unless you use a transaction with serializable isolation,
> this all visible rows for the second statement might be different from those
> that you copied into the log table.
>
> With the normal Read committed isolation level you suffer from a possible
> nonrepeatable read that might change tuple visibility between different
> statements.

That depends on implementation. A select into ... to do the initial
copy followed by a delete where... with the where clause referencing
the log table itself to ensure that we delete only things that now
exist in the log table, or a row by row insert/delete pair. Either
would provide the appropriate level of protection from accidental
deletion of more things than you intended without harming concurrency.
The delete referencing the log table might require that the log table
be indexed for performance, but it's likely that such indexing would
be done anyway for general log use.
--
- David T. Wilson
david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mary Ellen Fitzpatrick 2008-04-22 19:00:33 Re: Can not restart postgres: Panic could not locate a valid checkpoint record
Previous Message Joris Dobbelsteen 2008-04-22 18:48:59 Re: table as log (multiple writers and readers)