Horton

Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>

View thread
From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>, Boxuan Zhai <bxzhai2010@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-01-03T16:35:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 03.01.2011 18:29, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 18:08 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> It works in read committed mode, because you acquire a new snapshot
>> after the LOCK TABLE, and anyone else who modified the table must commit
>> before the lock is granted. In serializable mode you get a serialization
>> error.
>
> If its not safe without this
>
> LOCK TABLE ... IN SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE
>
> then we should do that automatically, and document that.

No we should not. The SQL standard doesn't require that, and it would 
unnecessarily restrict concurrent updates on unrelated rows in the table.

-- 
   Heikki Linnakangas
   EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com