On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 12:50:26PM -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > If you always SELECT ... FOR UPDATE (in all transactions that access it), > then the second one will not see the DB state before the transaction is > started, because the row is locked and the second transaction won't be > able to get its lock and will instead wait. Admittedly this lowers your > ability to have concurrent reads of the same rows as well, so you would > want the other transactions to hold the lock for as short a time as > possible. I was wondering, if I do something like select * from person order by surname for update limit 1 offset 10; as there is no where clause, am I locking the whole table? Cheers, Patrick
