Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid
Date
Msg-id 4D21FAC6.3020502@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 03.01.2011 18:29, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 18:08 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> It works in read committed mode, because you acquire a new snapshot
>> after the LOCK TABLE, and anyone else who modified the table must commit
>> before the lock is granted. In serializable mode you get a serialization
>> error.
>
> If its not safe without this
>
> LOCK TABLE ... IN SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE
>
> then we should do that automatically, and document that.

No we should not. The SQL standard doesn't require that, and it would 
unnecessarily restrict concurrent updates on unrelated rows in the table.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid
Next
From: Florian Pflug
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid