On Mar 5, 2007, at 4:16 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
I'm no Postgres expert, but I don't think a SELECT should block an UPDATE in an MVCC database system unless the first statement is a SELECT FOR UPDATE or similar. Maybe if you use an isolation level of REPEATABLE READ.
Yeah. I think the system was configured to select for update by default. There were a bunch of fixes possible: change default isolation level use the locking db handle for that call "SELECT FOR SHARE" migrate the calli ended up being lazy, and just moved the call a few lines down, so no issues would occur for now. not the best fix, but it works and frees me some time for other important issues ;)
i also put a request in with rosedb , so that people can "FOR UPDATE" or "FOR SHARE" explicitly, which I would have rather done. I tried to patch things myself, but it started touching so many internals of rose that I figured jon would yell at me for submitting a patch before asking :)
// Jonathan Vanasco| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| FindMeOn.com - The cure for Multiple Web Personality Disorder | Web Identity Management and 3D Social Networking| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| RoadSound.com - Tools For Bands, Stuff For Fans | Collaborative Online Management And Syndication Tools| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mail converted by mhonarc 2.6.15
This archive provided courtesy of JSW4.NET, Internet Hosting Services for Small Business.