Thank you for your comments. Sorry for the late reply.
From: Kirk Wolak Sent: Friday, November 25, 2022 6:12 PM
> My first question is why are you not using "WHERE CURRENT OF" cursor_name?
I thought that cursors are preferred for manipulating large numbers of rows.
So I did not consider using
My first question is why are you not using "WHERE CURRENT OF" cursor_name?
The link to the page follows.
But effectively, you are locking the row and that is the row you want to
update (the current row of the cursor).
I wonder if that addresses the problem...
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/curre
Hi All.
When multiple sessions tried to acquire a row lock on the same tuple
sequentially, I expected
that the first session waiting for the lock would acquire the lock first
(FIFO). However, when we
actually tested it, there were cases where a session that was behind a first
session acquired
a
