Re: database-level lockdown - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Filipe Pina
Subject Re: database-level lockdown
Date
Msg-id 1436192099.5709.1@smtp.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: database-level lockdown  ("Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com>)
Responses Re: database-level lockdown  (Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>)
List pgsql-general
Yes, I've tried to come up with guideline to enumerate tables used in each process, but it's not simple because it's python application calling pgsql functions that use other functions, so it's tricky for a developer re-using existing functions to enumerate the tables used for those. Even if everything is well documented and can be re-used seems like a nasty task...

For now, I'm locking all to be able to close the gap, but I'm also wondering if I could do it in a pgsql function as I mentioned in the question:

FUNCTION A
-> FUNCTION B
----> lock TABLE
-> FUNCTION C
----> TABLE is not locked anymore because function B frees it as soon as it returns

Is there someway to have a function that locks some tables on the "outter" transaction instead of its own subtransaction?

On Seg, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:08 , Filipe Pina <filipe.pina@impactzero.pt> wrote:


On Dom, Jul 5, 2015 at 2:50 , Greg Sabino Mullane <greg@turnstep.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Filipe Pina said:
I really can't find any other solution for what I need (in short: make sure no transactions are left out due to serialization failures)
I think you may have been too quick to rule out advisory locks as a solution. Yes, you will need wrappers around all other calls, but extraordinary problems call for extraordinary solutions.
I could place the locks from the adapter directly at the outer transaction level but I have the feeling that performance would be worse...
Well, performance has really got to take a back seat, given your other requirements. ;) Locking certainly *could* work - and is arguably the best solution, as that's what locks are for. Just have your Very Important Transaction retry, and upon reaching that critical number, exclusively lock just the tables being used, then try again. If you don't know which tables are being used, I suggest storing that somewhere your class can find it, or moving away from such a generic class. There are other solutions (e.g. forcing conflicting processes to quit and sleep a second), but the locking one seems the easiest. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/ PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201507050943 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAlWZNeoACgkQvJuQZxSWSshVngCgpzGg7/OXRcyE2JgwDxDTFr9X o7UAn3ENNgmIVqPpR4j1kyooiu+Ool7A =6FSv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Filipe Pina
Date:
Subject: Re: database-level lockdown
Next
From: Mark Morgan Lloyd
Date:
Subject: Re: [pg_hba.conf] publish own Python application using PostgreSQL