Re: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking
Date
Msg-id 9587.1487623489@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking  (Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464@outlook.com>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking  (Karsten Hilbert <Karsten.Hilbert@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-general
Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464@outlook.com> writes:
> In the chapter "Using optimistic locking" of the book "PG Cookbook Second Edition"
> it is mentioned how the app can first fetch row from the table in the form
> select a.*::text from table a where ...
> Then do the work and then when it comes to committing do it as
>    update table
>           set ....
>    where table.*::text = (saved from select).

> If the row was changed between the time it was first read and updated, the
> update will do touch any rows as the ::text will be different.

> Why can't we use xmin and xmax columns to achieve the same.

Well, that doesn't do quite the same thing: the cookbook query will
proceed if there was a no-op update in between (or maybe even two updates
that canceled each other out).  If you look at xmin then you won't proceed
in such cases.  I could imagine either behavior being "right" depending on
your application needs.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Gabriel Ortiz Lour
Date:
Subject: Fwd: [GENERAL] Streaming Replication Without Downtime
Next
From: Adam Brusselback
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Search on very big (partitioned) table