Benjamin Börngen-Schmidt wrote: > The Lateral statement does return a result, which I do not expect. I returns > an end point multiple times for diverent start points. Why? I thought, that > the selected point by the lateral is locked by the FOR UPDATE and if the > lateral selects a point that is already locked it will be skipped by the > SKIP LOCKED.
So you want the LATERAL to lock a row, such that that row is not returned by the "s" arm of the left join in the same query because of SKIP LOCKED? That seems flawed to me: the row lock is considered automatically granted if the would-be locker is the same transaction as the lock holder. I am too lazy to reverse engineer your schema. Are de_sim_points_end and de_sim_points_start views on the same table(s), or something like that? -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
