Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets

On 10/06/15 17:12, Jan Wieck wrote:
> for (...)
> {
>     s_lock();
>     // do something with a global variable
>     s_unlock();
> }

OK, I understand now, thank you. I am not sure if this test case is appropriate
for the critical sections in postgres (if it was, we'd not have the problem we
are discussion).

Nils