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