The SELECT FOR UPDATE
statement is used to order transactions by controlling concurrent access to one or more rows of a table.
It works by locking the rows returned by a selection query, such that other transactions trying to access those rows are forced to wait for the transaction that locked the rows to finish. These other transactions are effectively put into a queue based on when they tried to read the value of the locked rows.
Because this queueing happens during the read operation, the thrashing that would otherwise occur if multiple concurrently executing transactions attempt to SELECT
the same data and then UPDATE
the results of that selection is prevented. By preventing thrashing, CockroachDB also prevents transaction retries that would otherwise occur due to contention.
As a result, using SELECT FOR UPDATE
leads to increased throughput and decreased tail latency for contended operations.
Note that using SELECT FOR UPDATE
does not completely eliminate the chance of serialization errors, which use the SQLSTATE
error code 40001
, and emit error messages with the string restart transaction
. These errors can also arise due to time uncertainty. To eliminate the need for application-level retry logic, in addition to SELECT FOR UPDATE
your application also needs to use a driver that implements automatic retry handling.
CockroachDB does not support the FOR SHARE
or FOR KEY SHARE
locking strengths.
By default, CockroachDB uses the SELECT FOR UPDATE
locking mechanism during the initial row scan performed in UPDATE
and UPSERT
statement execution. To turn off implicit SELECT FOR UPDATE
locking for UPDATE
and UPSERT
statements, set the enable_implicit_select_for_update
session variable to false
.
Syntax
The following diagram shows the supported syntax for the optional FOR
locking clause of a SELECT
statement.
For the full SELECT
statement syntax documentation, see Selection Queries.
Parameters
Locking strengths
Locking strength dictates the row-level locking behavior on rows retrieved by a SELECT
statement.
Parameter | Description |
---|---|
FOR SHARE /FOR KEY SHARE |
This syntax is a no-op, allowed for PostgreSQL compatibility. Specifying FOR SHARE /FOR KEY SHARE does not cause CockroachDB to use shared locks over the rows retrieved by a statement.Note that CockroachDB always ensures serializability, regardless of the specified locking strength. |
FOR UPDATE /FOR NO KEY UPDATE |
Lock the rows returned by the SELECT statement, such that other transactions trying to access the rows must wait for the transaction to finish.Note that in CockroachDB, the FOR NO KEY UPDATE locking strength is identical to the FOR UPDATE locking strength. |
Wait policies
Wait policies determine how a SELECT FOR UPDATE
statement handles conflicts with locks held by other active transactions. By default, SELECT FOR UPDATE
queries on rows that are already locked by an active transaction must wait for the transaction to finish.
Parameter | Description |
---|---|
SKIP LOCKED |
New in v22.2: Skip rows that cannot be immediately locked. |
NOWAIT |
Return an error if a row cannot be locked immediately. |
For documentation on all other parameters of a SELECT
statement, see Selection Queries.
Required privileges
The user must have the SELECT
and UPDATE
privileges on the tables used as operands.
Known limitations
Locks acquired using SELECT ... FOR UPDATE
are dropped on lease transfers and range splits and merges. SELECT ... FOR UPDATE
locks should be thought of as best-effort, and should not be relied upon for correctness, as they are implemented as fast, in-memory unreplicated locks.
If a lease transfer or range split/merge occurs on a range held by an unreplicated lock, the lock is dropped, and the following behaviors can occur:
- The desired ordering of concurrent accesses to one or more rows of a table expressed by your use of
SELECT ... FOR UPDATE
may not be preserved (that is, a transaction B against some table T that was supposed to wait behind another transaction A operating on T may not wait for transaction A). - The transaction that acquired the (now dropped) unreplicated lock may fail to commit, leading to transaction retry errors with code
40001
and therestart transaction
error message.
We intend to improve the reliability of these locks. For details, see cockroachdb/cockroach#75456.
Note that serializable isolation is preserved despite this limitation.
Examples
Enforce transaction order when updating the same rows
This example uses SELECT FOR UPDATE
to lock a row inside a transaction, forcing other transactions that want to update the same row to wait for the first transaction to complete. The other transactions that want to update the same row are effectively put into a queue based on when they first try to read the value of the row.
This example assumes you are running a local unsecured cluster.
First, connect to the running cluster (call this Terminal 1):
cockroach sql --insecure
Next, create a table and insert some rows:
CREATE TABLE kv (k INT PRIMARY KEY, v INT);
INSERT INTO kv (k, v) VALUES (1, 5), (2, 10), (3, 15);
Next, we'll start a transaction and lock the row we want to operate on:
BEGIN;
SELECT * FROM kv WHERE k = 1 FOR UPDATE;
Press Enter twice in the SQL client to send the statements to be evaluated. This will result in the following output:
k | v
+---+----+
1 | 5
(1 row)
Now open another terminal and connect to the database from a second client (call this Terminal 2):
cockroach sql --insecure
From Terminal 2, start a transaction and try to lock the same row for updates that is already being accessed by the transaction we opened in Terminal 1:
BEGIN;
SELECT * FROM kv WHERE k = 1 FOR UPDATE;
Press Enter twice to send the statements to be evaluated. Because Terminal 1 has already locked this row, the SELECT FOR UPDATE
statement from Terminal 2 will appear to "wait".
Back in Terminal 1, update the row and commit the transaction:
UPDATE kv SET v = v + 5 WHERE k = 1;
UPDATE 1
COMMIT;
COMMIT
Now that the transaction in Terminal 1 has committed, the transaction in Terminal 2 will be "unblocked", generating the following output, which shows the value left by the transaction in Terminal 1:
k | v
+---+----+
1 | 10
(1 row)
The transaction in Terminal 2 can now receive input, so update the row in question again:
UPDATE kv SET v = v + 5 WHERE k = 1;
UPDATE 1
Finally, commit the transaction in Terminal 2:
COMMIT;
COMMIT