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: