Обсуждение: Re: WIP patch (v2) for updatable security barrier views

(Sorry if this breaks the thread history; on mobile)

> > Am I right in thinking that the "locking gotcha" only happens if you
> > create a security_barrier view conaining a "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE"? If
> > so, that seems like rather a niche case - not that that means we
> > shouldn't warn people about it.
>
> Hmm, the 'gotcha' I was referring to was the issue discussed upthread
> around rows getting locked to be updated which didn't pass all the quals
> (they passed the security_barrier view's, but not the user-supplied
> ones), which could happen during a normal 'update' against a
> security_barrier view, right?  I didn't think that would require the
> view definition to be 'FOR UPDATE';

It doesn't require the view to be defined FOR UPDATE.

I'll try to write an isolstiontester case to donstrate this on the weekend.

* Craig Ringer (craig@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > Hmm, the 'gotcha' I was referring to was the issue discussed upthread
> > around rows getting locked to be updated which didn't pass all the quals
> > (they passed the security_barrier view's, but not the user-supplied
> > ones), which could happen during a normal 'update' against a
> > security_barrier view, right?  I didn't think that would require the
> > view definition to be 'FOR UPDATE';
>
> It doesn't require the view to be defined FOR UPDATE.

Ok, great, glad I got that correct. :)

> I'll try to write an isolstiontester case to donstrate this on the weekend.

Great, thanks.  I'll take a stab at writing up the 'gotcha' note tonight
or tomorrow.
Thanks again,
    Stephen