[Pgpool-hackers] Idea to handle sequences

[Jehan-Guillaume (ioguix) de Rorthais]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le 08/01/2011 04:24, Tatsuo Ishii a écrit :
>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
>>>
>>> On master we do:
>>>
>>> BEGIN;
>>> SELECT 1 FROM t1_i_seq FOR UPDATE;
>>
>> and why you are allowed to execute FOR UPDATE in a sequence? i mean,
>> if you can't lock the secuence it has no sense that you can lock the
>> rows on it... is it not a postgres bug that we should report instead
>> of exploit it?
> 
> Not sure I want to report it. 

In my opinion, *if* this is actually a bug, we must report it. It's all about
code quality, sanity and fiability.

> The "bug" does not hurt PostgreSQL users
> in any sense, for example security issues.
> 
> Theoreticaly we could fix this "bug" and provide "formal" way to lock
> sequences instead. But I doubt PostgreSQL cores agree to provide such
> new API, which is probably only benefitical to pgpool users.

*If* this is a bug, what if it just accept the lock, but doesn't respect it ?

> So I guess reporting the "bug" and fixing it will not benefit anyone,
> on the other hand pgpool users will lose their benefit.

If we rely on a bug for a feature, then the design is probably somewhat broken no ?

> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
> Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp

- -- 
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
DBA
http://www.dalibo.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk0obJsACgkQXu9L1HbaT6LyLgCg5XJWmy14J3mJiiBiglyBbR2j
jB0AoJtzT2eLpF3OnorF9Epm5WuQAAcU
=Z2kr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----