Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> You can lock a table even while you have no valid snapshot?
Certainly. In serializable mode, you really need to be able to take out
locks before the snapshot is set --- TFM explains:
Note also that if one is relying on explicit locking to prevent
concurr
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 06:22:06PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> This strikes me as a pretty unreasonable restriction. It would be OK
> if there were no valid uses of SPI that didn't require a snapshot, but
> that's not so. As an example, consider trying to issue a LOCK TABLE
> command via SPI (okay,
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> As per discussion on -hackers, type input functions can be called prior
> to there being a current snapshot, causing any queries you execute to
> fail with the "no snapshot has been set" error. So I propose to simply
> have SPI_connect fail right off the bat and do
[Please CC any replies]
Hi,
As per discussion on -hackers, type input functions can be called prior
to there being a current snapshot, causing any queries you execute to
fail with the "no snapshot has been set" error. So I propose to simply
have SPI_connect fail right off the bat and document tha
