Re: Misunderstanding transactions and locks - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Misunderstanding transactions and locks
Date
Msg-id 14198.1276720637@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Misunderstanding transactions and locks  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Misunderstanding transactions and locks
List pgsql-general
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Michael P. Soulier's message of mié jun 16 12:21:16 -0400 2010:
>> I'm trying to figure out why locking isn't working as I'm expecting. I have a
>> an operation wrapped in a transaction where I explicitely grab an exclusive
>> lock on my table. When another process concurrently runs to do the same, it
>> should block on attempting to acquire the exclusive lock, no?

>> 2010-06-16 12:14:31.913008500 LOG:  statement: LOCK TABLE instances IN ROW
>> EXCLUSIVE MODE

> "row exclusive mode" does not block itself.

Specifically, see the table in
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-TABLES

Exclusive lock modes are those that conflict with themselves; to wit,
SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE mode or higher.  The mode names are, um, historical.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Misunderstanding transactions and locks
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: consequent PQsendQueryPrepared() failed: another command is already in progress