I'm more concerned with the locking, which is thoroughly unexpected behavior to me.
-tfo
-- Thomas F. O'Connell Co-Founder, Information Architect Sitening, LLC http://www.sitening.com/ 110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6 Nashville, TN 37203-6320 615-260-0005
On Feb 2, 2005, at 12:03 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
"Thomas F.O'Connell" <tfo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
UPDATE groups
SET count1 = v_group_count1, count2 = v_group_count2, count3 =
For instance, when run, this stored procedure could try to acquire a lock on
users2_groups despite not directly referencing it.
Does the users2_groups contain a foreign key reference to the groups table? If
so then if you need to update the groups table regularly you'll want an index
on the referring column. Otherwise in order to check the constraint Postgres
needs to do a sequential scan of the referring table to make sure your update
doesn't break a reference.
I don't know how this plays with locks though.
-- greg
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org