| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lock compatibility matrix |
| Date: | 2007-01-30 20:17:15 |
| Message-ID: | 1170188236.3681.226.camel@silverbirch.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 11:09 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> > I had this in a different form, but reworked so that it matches the
> > doc patch that Teodor submitted earlier. I think it would be good to
> > have this information in the lock.h file as well.
>
> Why would we want to have two redundant copies of the same information?
The lock information is not available anywhere in the form of a matrix.
I've personally found a matrix useful for application design, though
that hasn't influenced Pavan's independent creation of exactly that.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-30 20:31:37 | Re: Lock compatibility matrix |
| Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2007-01-30 20:14:16 | Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump pretty_print |