Thread: Detect Locked Row Without Blocking
Is there a recommended "postgres way" to determine if a certain row is locked... without blocking? In my custom postgres client app I'd like to be able to determine if another user is "modifying" a given record. If so, I would present a dialog to the user such as "Record Locked. Sam Smith is already modifying this record. Try again later." I've looked at SELECT FOR UPDATE which looks good except for that it blocks. I don't want my UI to freeze up... I just want to notify the user that it's locked and move on. Any thoughts? Thanks.
Joe Lester <joe_lester@sweetwater.com> writes: > Is there a recommended "postgres way" to determine if a certain row is > locked... without blocking? 8.1 has a SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT option. Alternatively, just do a wait while having a very short statement_timeout. > In my custom postgres client app I'd like to be able to determine if > another user is "modifying" a given record. If so, I would present a > dialog to the user such as "Record Locked. Sam Smith is already > modifying this record. Try again later." However, I think the question is moot because it's predicated on a terrible underlying approach. You should NEVER design a DB app to hold a lock while some user is editing a record (and answering the phone, going out to lunch, etc). Fetch the data and then let the user edit it while you are not in a transaction. When he clicks UPDATE, do BEGIN; SELECT the row FOR UPDATE; check for any changes since you fetched the data originally if none, UPDATE and commit else rollback and tell user about it If you do see conflicting changes, then you have enough info to resolve the conflicts or abandon the update. regards, tom lane
I see... For my purposes, I'd still rather notify the user up-front that the record is "in modify" (kind of like FileMaker does)... even though now I understand that a row lock is not the right mechanism for that. Is there a "best-practice" for this approach? What about using a field to flag the record as "in modify"? But I guess then you'd have to protect against two different users selecting/updating the field at roughly the same time, each user then thinking that he has gained modify privileges for that record. I'm not sure a row lock would help any in this circumstance... and I don't want to resort to table locks for performance reasons. On Nov 8, 2005, at 10:14 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Lester <joe_lester@sweetwater.com> writes: >> In my custom postgres client app I'd like to be able to determine if >> another user is "modifying" a given record. If so, I would present a >> dialog to the user such as "Record Locked. Sam Smith is already >> modifying this record. Try again later." > > However, I think the question is moot because it's predicated on a > terrible underlying approach. You should NEVER design a DB app to hold > a lock while some user is editing a record (and answering the phone, > going out to lunch, etc). > Fetch the data and then let the user edit > it while you are not in a transaction. When he clicks UPDATE, do > BEGIN; > SELECT the row FOR UPDATE; > check for any changes since you fetched the data originally > if none, UPDATE and commit > else rollback and tell user about it > > If you do see conflicting changes, then you have enough info to resolve > the conflicts or abandon the update.