Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique.
| От | Lincoln Yeoh |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3.0.5.32.20000425155652.008dbb60@pop.mecomb.po.my обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Revisited: Transactions, insert unique. (Mike Mascari <mascarm@mascari.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
At 10:17 PM 24-04-2000 -0400, Mike Mascari wrote:
>Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
>PostgreSQL implements SELECT...FOR UPDATE to allow for the
>sequence you'be described:
>
>Session 1:
>
>BEGIN;
>SELECT webuser FROM webusers WHERE webuser = 'webuser1';
>
>Session 2:
>
>BEGIN;
>UPDATE webusers SET webuser = 'webuser2' WHERE webuser =
>'webuser1';*
The 6.5.3 running on my site does not block for the case I described which
has an INSERT after the select.
begin;
select from mytable where field=value for update;
if rows=0 {
insert into mytable (field,field2) values (value,value2);
} else {
update mytable set field=value, field2=value2;
}
commit;
Tested on 6.5.3.
Did a select for update in two concurrent transactions, they did not block,
and both inserts went through (if there was a unique, one of the
transactions would have had to be rolled back and redone from scratch).
If the behaviour is different for 7.0, I'm interested!
Cheerio,
Link.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: