On Saturday, December 10, 2016, Tom DalPozzo <t.dalpo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have one direct DB client (let's name it MIDAPP) only. This client of > the DB is a server for up to 10000 final clients. > Any time MIDAPP is going to reply to a client, it must save a "status > record with some data" related to that client and only after that, > answering /committing the final client. > The next time the same final client will ask something, the same status > record will be updated again (with a different content). > Why do you want to pay for concurrency control when you don't seem to need it? While PostgreSQL likely can do what you need I suspect there are applications out there that can solve this specific problem better. Even something as simple as a flat file, one per "final client", written atomically and fsynced after each write/rename. David J,
