On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 06:33:01PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Aug-13, David Christensen wrote:
>
> > Both bugs #16676[1] and #17141[2] illustrate that the combination of
> > SKIP LOCKED and FETCH FIRST WITH TIES break expectations when it comes
> > to rows returned to other sessions ac
On 2021-Aug-13, David Christensen wrote:
> Both bugs #16676[1] and #17141[2] illustrate that the combination of
> SKIP LOCKED and FETCH FIRST WITH TIES break expectations when it comes
> to rows returned to other sessions accessing the same row. Since this
> situation is detectable from the synta
On 2021-Oct-01, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 03:55:10PM -0500, David Christensen wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 3:51 PM Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> >> I think we should do this, given that it has show potential to bite
> >> people. We should also add a small mentioned to
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 03:55:10PM -0500, David Christensen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 3:51 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> I think we should do this, given that it has show potential to bite
>> people. We should also add a small mentioned to this in the docs, as in
>> the attached.
>>
>> Wh
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 3:51 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2021-Aug-13, David Christensen wrote:
>
> > Both bugs #16676[1] and #17141[2] illustrate that the combination of
> > SKIP LOCKED and FETCH FIRST WITH TIES break expectations when it comes
> > to rows returned to other sessions accessing
On 2021-Aug-13, David Christensen wrote:
> Both bugs #16676[1] and #17141[2] illustrate that the combination of
> SKIP LOCKED and FETCH FIRST WITH TIES break expectations when it comes
> to rows returned to other sessions accessing the same row. Since this
> situation is detectable from the synta
