Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks
Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>
From: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>
To: Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-02-10T08:15:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:36, Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.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