On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 9:28 PM, Gregory Stark <st...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: >> (3) A finer-grained approach would be to make no-effect updates to >> rows to lock them if they are to be read for purposes of updating >> something else in the transaction. This could have a high cost in >> disk access and table bloat. It has the advantage of providing a >> simple technique which, if applied consistently, doesn't require >> knowledge of software beyond what is under development. > > "no-effect updates" would be just the same as SELECT FOR UPDATE
...except that SELECT FOR UPDATE won't create table bloat, or as much I/O... I think? > However this has the same problem that we previously discussed where someone > can still add new records which would have changed the results of the query. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
