Re: serializable read only deferrable

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>,"Florian Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: serializable read only deferrable
Date: 2010-12-06 22:20:53
Message-ID: 4CFD0D650200002500038385@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On 06.12.2010 22:53, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> What would be the correct way for a process to put itself to
>> sleep, and for another process to later wake it up?
>
> See ProcWaitSignal/ProcSendSignal. Or the new 'latch' code.

Is there a reason to prefer one over the other?

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2010-12-06 22:46:31 Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-12-06 22:02:59 Re: serializable read only deferrable