Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking

Started by Michael Paquierover 11 years ago5 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Michael Paquier
michael@paquier.xyz

Hi all,

Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for
SELECT query:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS
However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page
describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a
portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not
mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE. It seems that
this is something rather misleading for the user:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS

Attached is a patch that refactors the whole and improves the documentation:
- Addition of a table showing the conflicts between each lock
- Moved description of each row-level lock mode to the explicit locking page
- Addition of a link in SELECT portion to redirect the user to the
explicit locking page
Regards,
--
Michael

Attachments:

20141010_rowlock_doc_refactor.patchtext/x-patch; charset=US-ASCII; name=20141010_rowlock_doc_refactor.patchDownload+152-81
#2Jim Nasby
Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com
In reply to: Michael Paquier (#1)
Re: Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking

On 10/10/14, 8:31 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:

Hi all,

Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for
SELECT query:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS
However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page
describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a
portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not
mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE. It seems that
this is something rather misleading for the user:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS

Attached is a patch that refactors the whole and improves the documentation:
- Addition of a table showing the conflicts between each lock
- Moved description of each row-level lock mode to the explicit locking page
- Addition of a link in SELECT portion to redirect the user to the
explicit locking page

Did this get committed? Should probably add it to the commitfest if not...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

#3Michael Paquier
michael@paquier.xyz
In reply to: Jim Nasby (#2)
Re: Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>
wrote:

Did this get committed? Should probably add it to the commitfest if not...

Already done in CF3, I should have mentioned it:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1594
--
Michael

#4Alvaro Herrera
alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
In reply to: Michael Paquier (#1)
Re: Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking

Michael Paquier wrote:

Hi all,

Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for
SELECT query:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS
However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page
describing all the explicit locks of the system that there is a
portion dedicated to row-level locks and this section is not
mentioning at all FOR KEY SHARE and FOR NO KEY UPDATE.

Thanks, I applied it to master and 9.4 after some slight
editorialization.

--
�lvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

#5Michael Paquier
michael@paquier.xyz
In reply to: Alvaro Herrera (#4)
Re: Inconsistencies in documentation of row-level locking

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

Thanks, I applied it to master and 9.4 after some slight
editorialization.

Thanks.
--
Michael

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers