Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks
| От | Merlin Moncure | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTi=xRvU1S_Poj2Dnz_pjs8Yr8mso5y=Caajm6+n4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes: >> Not that I'm necessarily against the proposal, but what does this do >> that can't already be done by locking a table or a table's row? > > I agree with Andres' point about this: sometimes it'd be more convenient > for an advisory lock to be released automatically at transaction end. > If you have a mix of clients that want that behavior with others that > want a persistent hold on the same locks, you can't do it with regular > locks. right, plus 4: automatic lock release on error. right now if I'm grabbing in-transaction lock inside a function, I have to put in sub transaction handler to guarantee release if anything non trivial happens mid lock. merlin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: