Re: Correct usage of FOR UPDATE?
От | Dmitriy Igrishin |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Correct usage of FOR UPDATE? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTim9x6prp_Vxpzadq3KV0Pd2RhVpUSjyT8ijsqUS@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Correct usage of FOR UPDATE? (Joe Carr <joe.carr@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-sql |
Hey Joe,
You can wrap the given query in the PL/pgSQL function,
catch the exception and return NULL if it occurs. Please see
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/plpgsql-control-structures.html#PLPGSQL-ERROR-TRAPPING
--
// Dmitriy.
You can wrap the given query in the PL/pgSQL function,
catch the exception and return NULL if it occurs. Please see
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/plpgsql-control-structures.html#PLPGSQL-ERROR-TRAPPING
2010/12/9 Joe Carr <joe.carr@gmail.com>
Hello,I have a simple table-based queue system, and I'd looking for some advice on improving my dequeue function. it boils down to:SELECT idFROM queueWHERE <whereclause>FOR UPDATE NOWAIT;which works well, in that no item gets dequeued more that once. The issue, however is that when a contention occurs, the error "could not obtain lock on row in relation" is raised.Is there a way that I can rewrite this so that when a contention occurs, there is no error? I would like the "winning" process to lock the row, and the "losing" process to select null rather than raise the rowlock error.thanks beforehand for any help!
--
// Dmitriy.
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: