On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 03:27:06PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I would say that two such transactions concurrently heavily implies
such, no? :)
Like I said, the text tries to explain it--but it remains murky!
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:33:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
What happens if I abort on the first transaction? If I'm reading this
Doesn't matter, because your second transaction doesn't read any of the
changes you're making there--until (and if) that first one commits. The
second
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 06:54:21PM +0100, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:33:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
What happens if I abort on the first transaction? If I'm reading this
AFAICS the part about not having inconsistencies refers only to the
spectre of
Would this not create the potention for a dead lock if transaction1 is
never completed, and still active for an indefinate period of time?
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 14:06, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What happens if I abort on the first transaction? If I'm reading
Chris Bowlby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would this not create the potention for a dead lock if transaction1 is
never completed, and still active for an indefinate period of time?
If trans1 later waits (directly or indirectly) for trans2, we'll detect
the deadlock and abort one xact or the other
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
If two such transactions concurrently try to change the balance of
account 12345, we clearly want the second transaction to start from the
updated version of the account's row
To me, I read this as the first transaction has
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
If two such transactions concurrently try to change the balance of
account 12345, we clearly want the second transaction to start from the
updated version of the account's
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What happens if I abort on the first transaction? If I'm reading this
right, if Trans2 does the exact same as above, and COMMITs before Trans1
Aborts, the value of balance becomes +200 (Trans2 + Trans1) ... but
