Re: Patch to allow multiple table locks in "Unison"

> In short, the order has to be user-specified, which pretty much
> means it had better be as given in the statement. Which raises
> the significant question of why bother with such a patch at all, as
> opposed to using a series of LOCK statements as one can do already.
> (With more flexibility, since separate LOCK statements can specify
> different lock modes.) What's the rationale for adding such a
> feature in the first place? I don't see that it's buying anything.

The advantage is that you don't hold lock A while waiting for lock B.
It gets all the locks at the same time.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(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