From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PG Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: sequence locking |
Date: | 2011-09-21 17:15:04 |
Message-ID: | 201109211915.05231.andres@anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wednesday 21 Sep 2011 19:03:17 Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Kevin Grittner
> >
> > <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> >> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> >>> - Its impossible to emulate proper locking yourself because
> >>> locking is not allowed for sequences
> >>>
> >>> Any arguments against allowing it again? It seems to have been
> >>> allowed in prehistoric times.
> >>
> >> It would be nice to allow it. I've had to create a dummy table
> >> just to use for locking a sequence (by convention).
> >
> > another (better?) way is advisory locks...
>
> Not under 9.0 or earlier if you want the lock to last until the end
> of the transaction. Also, the fact that advisory locks are only on
> numbers, without any mechanism for mapping those to character
> strings, makes them poorly suited to many tasks.
The usual trick is to lock on the oid of some database object. But I agree,
its a poor workaround for this specific problem.
Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-21 17:23:49 | Re: Hot Backup with rsync fails at pg_clog if under load |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-21 17:13:29 | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |