Re: Transaction size
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Transaction size |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 11099.1105363826@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Transaction size (Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl>) |
Ответы |
Re: Transaction size
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl> writes: >>> As they're inserts, and therefore not even touching the same data, I'm >>> quite certain it's not some kind of row locking issue (does that even >>> happen at all with MVCC?). >> >> I'm not. In particular this could be a foreign key locking issue --- >> does the target table have foreign keys, and if so could inserts from >> different transactions be referencing the same master row? > It does have a reference to a table with statusses, but those are rather > static. I suppose an integrity check is comparable to doing a select > with respect to locking strategies? (Meaning that it wouldn't be the > cause of my problem). No, unfortunately it's more like a SELECT FOR UPDATE and it does take a lock on the referenced row (with an eye to ensuring that the referenced row can't go away before the new referencing row is committed). I suspect this is indeed the cause of your problem. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: