Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZQtaZhTaP4DUJV05J3ok4mZuXrRHi=i_Go0RmPR=7O-WA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Locking the definitely visible row only works if there's a row matching
> the index's columns. If the values of the new row don't have
> corresponding values in all the indexes you have the same old race
> conditions again.

I still don't get it - perhaps you should break down exactly what you
mean with an example. I'm talking about potentially doing multiple
upserts per row proposed for insertion to handle multiple conflicts,
perhaps with some deletes between upserts, not just one upsert with a
single update part.

> I think to be useful for many cases you really need to be able to ask
> for a potentially conflicting row and be sure that if there's none you
> are able to insert the row separately.

Why? What work do you need to perform after reserving the right to
insert but before inserting? Can't you just upsert resulting in
insert, and then perform that work, potentially deleting the row
inserted if and when you change your mind? Is there any real
difference between what that does for you, and what any particular
variety of promise tuple might do for you?

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: fix_PGSTAT_NUM_TABENTRIES_macro patch
Next
From: Andreas Karlsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Planning time in explain/explain analyze