Steve A <golfmat1@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > In a nutshell, I'm curious about the order in which PG will lock rows during a SELECT FOR UPDATE. If two simultaneous SELECT FOR UPDATE statements select intersecting rows from the same table, can PG be relied upon to lock the rows in a consistent manner that always avoids deadlock (e.g. in order of ascending primary key)? Only if you use ORDER BY in each such query to constrain the rows to be locked in the same order. You probably want to spend some time perusing the fine manual very carefully: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-select.html#SQL-FOR-UPDATE-SHARE regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
