Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 14003.1292293385@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks (Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi> writes:
> On 2010-12-14 1:08 AM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote:
>> In my opinion changing current behavior is not a good idea. I know some
>> software that relies on current behavior and this would break it. Maybe add
>> that as an option, or add another type of advisory lock?
> Oh, I forgot to mention. The patch doesn't change any existing
> behaviour; the new behaviour can be invoked only by adding a new boolean
> argument:
Uh, I don't think so. It sure looks like you have changed the user
lockmethod to be transactional, ie, auto-release on commit/abort. As
Szymon stated, that is an utter non-starter, because all current uses of
advisory locks consider the current behavior to be a feature not a bug.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: