Thread: Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking
Hi all, Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for SELECT query: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE. It seems that this is something rather misleading for the user: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS Attached is a patch that refactors the whole and improves the documentation: - Addition of a table showing the conflicts between each lock - Moved description of each row-level lock mode to the explicit locking page - Addition of a link in SELECT portion to redirect the user to the explicit locking page Regards, -- Michael
Attachment
On 10/10/14, 8:31 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for > SELECT query: > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS > However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page > describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a > portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not > mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE. It seems that > this is something rather misleading for the user: > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS > > Attached is a patch that refactors the whole and improves the documentation: > - Addition of a table showing the conflicts between each lock > - Moved description of each row-level lock mode to the explicit locking page > - Addition of a link in SELECT portion to redirect the user to the > explicit locking page Did this get committed? Should probably add it to the commitfest if not... -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
<div dir="ltr">On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Jim Nasby <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com"target="_blank">Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com</a>></span> wrote:<br /><div class="gmail_extra"><divclass="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1pxsolid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> Did this get committed? Should probably add it to the commitfestif not...<span class=""><font color="#888888"><br /></font></span></blockquote></div>Already done in CF3, I shouldhave mentioned it:<br /><a href="https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1594">https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1594</a><br />--<br />Michael<br /></div></div>
Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for > SELECT query: > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS > However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page > describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a > portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not > mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE. Thanks, I applied it to master and 9.4 after some slight editorialization. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Thanks, I applied it to master and 9.4 after some slight > editorialization. Thanks. -- Michael