Re: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 9587.1487623489@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking (Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464@outlook.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking
|
| Список | 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
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: