Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks
Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>
From: Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Szymon Guz <mabewlun@gmail.com>
Date: 2010-12-14T14:23:51Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2010-12-14 4:19 PM +0200, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Andres Freund<andres@anarazel.de> wrote: >> On Tuesday 14 December 2010 00:14:22 Marko Tiikkaja wrote: >>> The lock space is the same though, but I don't feel strongly about it. >> I feel strongly that it needs the same locking space. I pretty frequently have >> the need for multiple clients trying to acquiring a lock in transaction scope >> (i.e. for accessing the cache) and one/few acquiring it in session scope (for >> building the cache). > > 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? Try without throwing an error. Regards, Marko Tiikkaja