From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | ZEUGSWETTER Andreas IZ5 <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] please? (non blocking lock) |
Date: | 1999-06-01 14:32:59 |
Message-ID: | 199906011432.KAA22312@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> > I don't know of any SQL databases that allow non-blocking lock requests.
> >
> Informix has all kinds of non blocking locks:
> return "record locked" at once
> return "record locked" after a specified timeout
> wait for the lock indefinitely
>
> To supply this behavior it has the following statements:
> set lock mode to not wait; -- return immediately with error
> -- if record already locked
> set lock mode to wait 10; -- wait at max 10 seconds
> set lock mode to wait; -- wait indefinitely
>
> Dirty read isolation has actually nothing to do with the wanted feature.
Oh, that's nice. I never looked at those commands before.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-06-01 14:33:13 | Re: [HACKERS] LIMITS |
Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-06-01 14:23:51 | Re: [HACKERS] Release date and docs |