Re: [HACKERS] please?

From: Pablo Funes <pablo(at)cs(dot)brandeis(dot)edu>
To: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian)
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] please?
Date: 1999-05-31 23:40:53
Message-ID: 199905312340.TAA03630@mancha.cs.brandeis.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Sharing file systems. Good point. You could have a table you use to
> > > lock. Lock the table, view the value, possibly modify, and unlock.
> > > This does not handle the case where someone died and did not remove
> > > their entry from the lock table.
> >
> > You can always write the modification time to the table as well and if
> > it's "too old", then try to override it.
> >
>
> Assuming you can set a reasonable "too old" time.
>

There may be many partial workarounds, depending on the
application, but there seems to be no robust way to have
a failed lock right now. Perhaps in a future version will
PQrequestCancel be able to terminate a waiting-for-lock
state?

Pablo

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 1999-05-31 23:51:06 Re: [HACKERS] New IP address datatype
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-05-31 23:28:22 Re: [HACKERS] please?