On Apr 22, 2008, at 3:20 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 02:19:24PM -0500, Decibel! wrote:But no matter how this is done, I think we need to handle the race conditions, and handle them by default. If people *really* know what they're doing, they can disable the row locking (perhaps one way to do this would be to grab an explicit lock on the table and have merge check for that...).I disagree. The spec doesn't require it and MERGE is useful without it. For a first cut I would say implement as the spec says, race conditionsand all. Later we can think on whether it's worth handling them directly.
That really strikes me as taking the "MySQL route". If push comes to shove, I'll take a MERGE with race conditions over no merge at all, but I think it's very important that it does the right thing. Just because the spec doesn't say anything about it doesn't mean it's ok.
-- Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
