Skip to content

Conversation

@sbidoul
Copy link
Member

@sbidoul sbidoul commented Jan 4, 2026

Since we are not going to delete records nor modify foreign keys, we can take a weaker lock.

See for instance this article which explains why FOR UPDATE is usually a lock that is too strong.

Since we are not going to delete records nor modify foreign keys,
we can take a weaker lock.
@sbidoul sbidoul added this to the 18.0 milestone Jan 4, 2026
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @guewen,
some modules you are maintaining are being modified, check this out!

@sbidoul sbidoul changed the title [IMP] queue_job: take weaker locks [18.0][IMP] queue_job: take weaker locks Jan 4, 2026
@sbidoul
Copy link
Member Author

sbidoul commented Jan 5, 2026

/ocabot merge patch

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-873-by-sbidoul-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot merged commit 5950735 into OCA:18.0 Jan 5, 2026
7 checks passed
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 7ba8b45. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

@sbidoul sbidoul deleted the 18.0-for-nokey-update-sbi branch January 5, 2026 11:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants