Στις Τρι 16 Αυγ 2016 11:23:59 π.μ. Marko Tiikkaja έγραψε:
> On 2016-08-16 08:19, x...@linux.gr wrote:
> > In order to avoid concurrent manipulation of rows, I do issue a
> > "SELECT .. FOR UPDATE" on the sets of rows, before UPDATEing
> > them (because UPDATEs cannot be ordered).
>
> Yeah, but FOR UPDATEs are not ordered either unless you use ORDER BY,
> which you didn't.
So, the case is that these two statements:
SELECT id FROM alerts ORDER BY id FOR UPDATE;
and
SELECT id FROM alerts ORDER BY id DESC FOR UPDATE;
are guarranteed to deadlock [1], right?
Well, in my opinion, this anti-pattern deserves to be documented.
Thank you for the quick response.
[1] because each of those statements will begin locking rows, one at a time,
and then reach the ones of the other statement and wait.
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
