| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks |
| Date: | 2011-01-21 17:18:33 |
| Message-ID: | 4D39BFE9.7030508@cs.helsinki.fi |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/20/2011 7:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marko Tiikkaja<marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> writes:
>> This seems useful, since the xact lock would be automatically released
>> if an error happens during "-- do something here" so you wouldn't need
>> to worry about releasing the lock elsewhere. But I'm not sure this is
>> safe. Can anyone see a problem with it?
>
> I think the POLA dictates that the behavior of that should be that you
> now have both a transactional and a nontransactional hold on the lock;
> and only the transactional hold goes away at commit.
Yes, I believe that's what happens now. But I guess you answered my
question too by not pointing out a huge flaw in that thinking.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2011-01-21 17:23:31 | Re: Sync Rep for 2011CF1 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-01-21 17:16:23 | Re: ALTER TABLE ... REPLACE WITH |