On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Jon Swinth wrote:
> How come having foreign keys take out a read lock on a parent row rather than
> a write lock is not on the todo list? I had someone tell me that this is
> difficult because the SQL standard does not include syntax for read lock.
> Does the fact that it will be difficult mean that it isn't needed?
Well, dealing with the locking may not be on the official TODO list but
it's on mine but I don't have alot of time to work on stuff so it's in the
eventual future. Just switching to a read lock may not actually fix some
of the deadlock issues that could be solved by switching up some details
of how the triggers work. But, each solution takes a bunch of time to
check possible failure cases either direction (towards deadlock or towards
an unsatisfied constraint).
