Re: [HACKERS] Locking when concurrent updated of foreign references

2011-04-11 Thread Jesper Krogh
On 2011-04-11 20:18, Jesper Krogh wrote: Hi. This seem a bit strange to me. In short: Not any more I.. I guess what made me a bit confused was that a update table set key = value would acually block out changes on tables referencing this tuple even if the referenced column wasn't effected by

Re: [HACKERS] Locking when concurrent updated of foreign references

2011-04-11 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Jesper Krogh's message of lun abr 11 17:07:33 -0300 2011: But when the locking is done row-level then it is correct to do it that way. It would allthough be nice with a weaker locklevel for that kind of updates (I have no clue if that is a hard problem).

Re: [HACKERS] Locking when concurrent updated of foreign references

2011-04-11 Thread Jesper Krogh
On 2011-04-11 23:30, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Excerpts from Jesper Krogh's message of lun abr 11 17:07:33 -0300 2011: But when the locking is done row-level then it is correct to do it that way. It would allthough be nice with a weaker locklevel for that kind of updates (I have no clue if that is