Re: SELECT FOR UPDATE performance is bad - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: SELECT FOR UPDATE performance is bad
Date
Msg-id 20060420165002.GY49405@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SELECT FOR UPDATE performance is bad  (Mario Splivalo <mario.splivalo@mobart.hr>)
List pgsql-performance
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 10:20:54AM +0200, Mario Splivalo wrote:
> This works perfectly, but sometimes the game has no codes, and I still
> need to know exactley who came first, who was second, and so on... So a
> locking table as Tom suggested is, I guess, a perfect solution for my
> situation...

Depending on your performance requirements, you should look at
contrib/userlock as well, since it will probably be much more performant
than locking a row in a table.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: merge>hash>loop
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Quick Performance Poll