Re: 8.2 beta blockers

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jimn(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: 8.2 beta blockers
Date: 2006-09-18 20:09:36
Message-ID: 3729.1158610176@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> yes, i can explain it in detail, and am willing to kick in some
> documentation.

Ah-hah, you're on the hook for docs then ;-).

I'm going to go ahead with implementing it in-core per my last proposal:

void pg_advisory_lock(int8) wait
void pg_advisory_lock_shared(int8) wait
bool pg_try_advisory_lock(int8) no wait
bool pg_try_advisory_lock_shared(int8) no wait
bool pg_advisory_unlock(int8) returns T if successful
bool pg_advisory_unlock_shared(int8) returns T if successful

plus all the above taking 2 int4's, plus

void pg_advisory_unlock_all()

but am happy to let someone else do the docs.

As far as the PR material goes, something like "advisory locks
incorporated into core" would be OK, but don't make it sound like
there was nothing there before ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-09-18 20:23:41 Re: An Idea for OID conflicts
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2006-09-18 20:05:31 Re: 8.2 beta blockers