| From: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks |
| Date: | 2011-02-10 08:15:28 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=EerOrjHWJmeiFpBinbRBZ0pHDXX344raSSdAV@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:36, Marko Tiikkaja
<marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> wrote:
>> One issue might be in pg_locks
> Robert suggested not doing this for 9.1, and I don't have anything against
> that.
Agreed.
> Updated patch attached.
Looks good to commit. I note a few minor issues for committer:
* Functions listed in "Table 9-62. Advisory Lock Functions" might need
sorted in alphabetical order.
* We could extend LockReleaseAll() to have the 3rd mode
instead of LockReleaseSession(). Existing behavior is:
| LockReleaseAll(LOCKMETHODID lockmethodid, bool allLocks)
| allLocks == true: release all locks including session locks.
| allLocks == false: release all non-session locks.
* Or, we might have one subroutine for LockReleaseSession() and
LockReleaseCurrentOwner(). They have similar codes.
--
Itagaki Takahiro
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-02-10 08:20:23 | Re: Varchar and binary protocol |
| Previous Message | Radosław Smogura | 2011-02-10 07:56:52 | Re: Varchar and binary protocol |