Heikki, > I just tested this. You are probably using the query cache in 4.0. Then > SELECT can return immediately without acquiring any locks.
Thank you very much. You are absolutly right. > Of course, it can be discussed if the query cache, too, should respect LOCK > TABLES. I am forwarding this to Sanja. IMHO current behaviour is absolutly correct. Mikhail. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Heikki Tuuri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 11:43 PM Subject: Re: InnoDB locking: Different behavior on 3.23.55 and 4.0.13 > Mikhail, > > I just tested this. You are probably using the query cache in 4.0. Then > SELECT can return immediately without acquiring any locks. > > Of course, it can be discussed if the query cache, too, should respect LOCK > TABLES. I am forwarding this to Sanja. > > Thank you, > > Heikki > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: ""Mikhail Entaltsev"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:44 PM > Subject: InnoDB locking: Different behavior on 3.23.55 and 4.0.13 > > > > ------=_NextPart_000_0119_01C351F2.03137C50 > > Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="koi8-r" > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > Hi > > > > I have 2 MySQL servers:=20 > > Server1 is 3.23.55-max-log > > Server2 is 4.0.13-standard-log > > > > Let's assume that we have 2 connections (Conn1 and Conn2) and table = > > test: > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > CREATE TABLE `test` ( > > `id` int(3) NOT NULL auto_increment, > > `name` char(10) default '', > > PRIMARY KEY (`id`) > > ) TYPE=3DInnoDB; > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > and put some data in it: > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > insert into test (id, name) values (1, 'cat'); > > insert into test (id, name) values (2, 'dog'); > > insert into test (id, name) values (3, 'bird'); > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > I execute queries in the order: > > > > Conn1:=20 > > LOCK TABLES test WRITE; > > > > then=20 > > > > Conn2: > > select * from test; > > > > On the Server1 Conn2 is locked and it will be locked even more=20 > > than innodb_lock_wait_timeout (that is not correct, right?). > > But on the Server2 Conn2 returns results immediately. > > > > I guess that Server2 is wrong. What do you think? > > > > Thanks, > > Mikhail. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0119_01C351F2.03137C50-- > > > > > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
