Re: READ UNCOMMITTED in postgres - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Thomas Kellerer
Subject Re: READ UNCOMMITTED in postgres
Date
Msg-id 7d37e627-9717-6acf-9ad5-f357d5d0f147@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to READ UNCOMMITTED in postgres  (Matthew Phillips <mphillips34@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Matthew Phillips schrieb am 19.12.2019 um 00:12:
> Hi, With the current READ UNCOMMITTED discussion happening on
> pgsql-hackers [1], It did raise a question/use-case I recently
> encountered and could not find a satisfactory solution for. If
> someone is attempting to poll for new records on a high insert volume
> table that has a monotonically increasing id, what is the best way to
> do it? As is, with a nave implementation, rows are not guaranteed to
> appear in monotonic order; so if you were to keep a $MAX_ID, and
> SELECT WHERE p_id > $MAX_ID, you would hit gaps. Is there a clean way
> to do this? I've seen READ UNCOMMITTED used for this with DB2.

In my understanding READ UNCOMMITTED in other databases is typically used to avoid read-locks which Postgres doesn't
have.
 
So I wonder what benefits READ UNCOMMITTED would have to begin with.

But, if you want to poll for new rows, then why don't you use a timestamp column?

  select *
  from the_table
  where created_at >= <last check time>

  



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: AccessExclusiveLock with pg_locks.locktype of tuple
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: READ UNCOMMITTED in postgres