On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/15/07 19:59, Panagiwths Pediadiths wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 09/15/07 03:28, Panagiwths Pediadiths wrote:
Thats the fun part, I actually need to allow duplicates in
On 9/15/07, Panagiwths Pediadiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shouldn't the serializable level prevent these duplicates? As I understand
it serializable
should give the same result as if the transactions were performed the one
after the other.
Thats the fun part, I actually need to allow duplicates in specific cases
but not in this one :)
Shouldn't the serializable level prevent these duplicates? As I understand
it serializable
should give the same result as if the transactions were performed the one
after the other.
Thnx
Panagiotis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/15/07 03:28, Panagiwths Pediadiths wrote:
Thats the fun part, I actually need to allow duplicates in specific cases
but not in this one :)
Same table?
Shouldn't the serializable level prevent these duplicates? As I understand
it
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 04:48:08PM +0300, Panagiotis Pediaditis wrote:
Is there some way of locking all database tables in a transaction
without knowing their names
or even better just locking the entire database? I know this is bad
tactics but there is a specific
case where i need it. Can
On 9/15/07, hubert depesz lubaczewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 04:48:08PM +0300, Panagiotis Pediaditis wrote:
Is there some way of locking all database tables in a transaction
without knowing their names
or even better just locking the entire database? I know this is
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/15/07 03:28, Panagiwths Pediadiths wrote:
Thats the fun part, I actually need to allow duplicates in specific cases
but not in this one :)
Same table?
Yup
Shouldn't the serializable level
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/15/07 19:59, Panagiwths Pediadiths wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 09/15/07 03:28, Panagiwths Pediadiths wrote:
Thats the fun part, I actually need to allow duplicates in specific cases
but not in this one :)
Same
Hello,
Is there some way of locking all database tables in a transaction
without knowing their names
or even better just locking the entire database? I know this is bad
tactics but there is a specific
case where i need it. Can it be done?
Thank you
Panagiotis
On 9/14/07, Panagiotis Pediaditis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... there is a specific case where i need it.
Don't really know, but, explain what the case is, and maybe someone
could help you.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list
Well the problem is I am working on rdf query engine for persistent RDF
data. The data is stored/structured in a specific way in the database.
When i perform updates in parallel, because there are cross table
dependencies, I end up with inconsistencies, For example One transaction
reads to see
On 9/14/07, Panagiotis Pediaditis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Is there some way of locking all database tables in a transaction
without knowing their names
or even better just locking the entire database? I know this is bad
tactics but there is a specific
case where i need it. Can it be
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 05:45:07PM +0300, Panagiotis Pediaditis wrote:
Well the problem is I am working on rdf query engine for persistent RDF
data. The data is stored/structured in a specific way in the database.
When i perform updates in parallel, because there are cross table
Panagiotis Pediaditis, 14.09.2007 16:45:
Well the problem is I am working on rdf query engine for persistent RDF
data. The data is stored/structured in a specific way in the database.
When i perform updates in parallel, because there are cross table
dependencies, I end up with inconsistencies,
A simpler example,
In the context of one transaction i do many queries of the form
INSERT INTO table value WHERE value NOT IN TABLE;
If i have 2 processes running the same 100s of these at the same time i
end up with duplicates.
Even with isolation set to serializable
any ideas?
On 9/14/07, Panagiotis Pediaditis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A simpler example,
In the context of one transaction i do many queries of the form
INSERT INTO table value WHERE value NOT IN TABLE;
If i have 2 processes running the same 100s of these at the same time i
end up with
On Monday 30 April 2001 02:37 pm, Jose Norberto wrote:
Hello all!
I want to make a pg_dump of a database, but I must be sure that no one is
logged in. Which is the best way to do it?
Thanks in advance
Change the permissions in the pg_hba.conf file
(/usr/local/pgsql/data/pg_hba.conf is the
Jose Norberto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I want to make a pg_dump of a database, but I must be sure that no one is
logged in.
Why?
pg_dump will return a consistent state of the database even if other
transactions are proceeding meanwhile.
regards, tom lane
18 matches
Mail list logo
