Re: Exposing the lock manager's WaitForLockers() to SQL

From: Will Mortensen <will(at)extrahop(dot)com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Marco Slot <marco(dot)slot(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Yvonne Chen <yvonne(at)extrahop(dot)com>, Jacob Speidel <jacob(at)extrahop(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Exposing the lock manager's WaitForLockers() to SQL
Date: 2024-03-27 05:16:47
Message-ID: CAMpnoC5kUF_8DCVxGCFO1Dp8GOe0ogd73J2xTpSNk=MrK7ZR0A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rebased, fixed a couple typos, and reordered the isolation tests to
put the most elaborate pair last.

Attachment Content-Type Size
v11-0001-Refactor-GetLockConflicts-into-more-general-GetL.patch application/octet-stream 11.1 KB
v11-0002-Allow-specifying-single-lockmode-in-WaitForLocke.patch application/octet-stream 7.7 KB
v11-0003-Add-pg_wait_for_lockers-function.patch application/octet-stream 29.4 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message shveta malik 2024-03-27 05:25:29 Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2024-03-27 04:56:01 Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation