Re: [SQL] User Permissions
От | Doug McNaught |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [SQL] User Permissions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m3elkomon5.fsf@varsoon.denali.to обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [SQL] User Permissions ("SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)" <michael_shelton@non.hp.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
"SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)" <michael_shelton@non.hp.com> writes: > Now, in the case of a select, then update/insert it will try an "optimistic" > (hope I'm getting my terminology correct here) lock on the table (which > will allow others to "read" the data or also apply "optimistic" locks -- > again for SELECT purposes -- but won't allow them to "change" or "write" the > data locked -- less obtrusive this way, helps speed up concurrent access to > tables). Then when you go to update whatever row, it would get an > "exclusive" lock meaning no one is allowed to even "read" the data let alone > "write" it. Again, the granularity (row vs page vs table) of the lock > depends on the PG implementation itself. > > Hopefully one of the authors of PG will respond and correct/clarify anything > I've said here. Actually you're completely and utterly wrong. ;) PG doesn't work that way, though other databases do. See: http://www.us.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.1/postgres/mvcc.html -Doug -- Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees. --T. J. Jackson, 1863
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: