Re: Revised Patch to allow multiple table locks in "Unison"

> Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)cygnus(dot)com> writes:
> > What about having the syntax
> > LOCK a,b,c;
> > now just as a shorthand for
> > LOCK a;
> > LOCK b;
> > LOCK c;
> > This would save typing and allow for Oracle compatibility.
>
> This seems fine to me (and in fact I thought we'd already agreed to it).
> Maybe some day we will get ambitious enough to make it do
> parallel-locking, but for now we can get 80% of what we want with 0.8%
> of the effort ;-)

I think that was my point, that even in the lock manager, we would have
starvation problems and things would get very complicated. In
hindsight, the idea of locking multiple tables in unison was just not
reasonable in PostgreSQL at this time.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026