Re: Apache::Session::Store::Postgres FOR UPDATE problems

[prev] [thread] [next] [Date index for 2005/05/02]

From: Perrin Harkins
Subject: Re: Apache::Session::Store::Postgres FOR UPDATE problems
Date: 22:27 on 02 May 2005
On Mon, 2005-05-02 at 15:08 -0700, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
> It is possible that the FOR UPDATE is spurious.  It signals to the
> database system that this transaction intends to write that row.  With
> PostgreSQL's MVCC transaction isolation system, it's probably not
> necessary and may be causing problems.

I'd say it's necessary if you want mutual exclusion, since MVCC will not
prevent lost updates.  Not everyone needs mutual exclusion, so it could
be made optional, or tied to a particular locking module selection.

- Perrin

Apache::Session::Store::Postgres FOR UPDATE problems
Kjetil Kjernsmo 14:50 on 29 Apr 2005

Re: Apache::Session::Store::Postgres FOR UPDATE problems
Perrin Harkins 22:27 on 02 May 2005

Generated at 10:25 on 04 May 2005 by mariachi v0.52