| From: | Paul Tillotson <pntil(at)shentel(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_locks view and user locks |
| Date: | 2004-09-14 00:06:08 |
| Message-ID: | 414635F0.5080704@shentel.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
This is the first I have ever heard "user locks," but I have more than
once wanted a lock that would persist beyond the end of a transaction.
Do these do that?
Paul
>"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>... is there any merit to promoting the user lock wrappers out of contrib
>>
>>
>
>Dunno. Yours is the first message I can recall in quite a long time
>indicating that anyone was using userlocks. I thought the code was kind
>of dying on the vine. Of course it's hard to tell whether that's not
>just *because* it's in contrib and not mainstream. But personally I'd
>like to see some more evidence of use before we promote it. (And yeah,
>the API could probably use some cleanup first.)
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-09-14 00:17:34 | Re: pg_locks view and user locks |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-09-13 22:55:38 | Cleaning up recovery from subtransaction start failure |