PostgreSQL SQL - Locking row

Author

Locking row

Flavio Suguimoto

2006-03-10, 8:24 pm

Hi all,

I need to mark a row with a value in a column, but first i need to select
the first row without this mark. But in some concurrents cases i mark the
row twice. How can i lock the row to avoid others session get it?

TABLE TICKET
TICKET_NUMBER | MARK
00001 | 1
00002 | 0

I need to select the first row with 0 in MARK column and then mark it with
1.

regards,
Flavio Suguimoto

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Larry Rosenman

2006-03-10, 8:24 pm

Flavio Suguimoto wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I need to mark a row with a value in a column, but first i need to
> select the first row without this mark. But in some concurrents cases
> i mark the row twice. How can i lock the row to avoid others session
> get it?
>
> TABLE TICKET
> TICKET_NUMBER | MARK
> 00001 | 1
> 00002 | 0
>
> I need to select the first row with 0 in MARK column and then mark it
> with 1.

look at the FOR UPDATE in the select docs.

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Michael Fuhr

2006-03-11, 3:23 am

On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:57:51PM -0600, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> Flavio Suguimoto wrote:
>
> look at the FOR UPDATE in the select docs.

If you use FOR UPDATE with LIMIT then see the following in the
SELECT documentation:

It is possible for a SELECT command using both LIMIT and FOR
UPDATE/SHARE clauses to return fewer rows than specified by
LIMIT. This is because LIMIT is applied first. The command
selects the specified number of rows, but might then block
trying to obtain lock on one or more of them. Once the SELECT
unblocks, the row might have been deleted or updated so that
it does not meet the query WHERE condition anymore, in which
case it will not be returned.

For example, suppose you have the following data:

ticket_number | mark
---------------+------
00001 | 1
00002 | 0
00003 | 0
(3 rows)

Two concurrent transactions, T1 and T2, both run the following
query:

SELECT * FROM ticket WHERE mark = 0 LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE;

One transaction, say T1, will get the following row:

ticket_number | mark
---------------+------
00002 | 0
(1 row)

T2 will block until T1 ends. If T1 rolls back or doesn't update
the row then T2 will get the above row. But if T1 updates the row
so that mark = 1 and then commits, then T2 will get an empty result
set instead of getting the next row with mark = 0. The queries
could use LIMIT 2 instead of LIMIT 1 and update only the first row
that came back, but then you'd have the same problem with a third
concurrent transaction (and with LIMIT 3 and a fourth transaction,
and so on).

--
Michael Fuhr

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql
.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Sponsored Links