Re: advisory locks and permissions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, AgentM <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: advisory locks and permissions
Date: 2006-09-22 19:06:00
Message-ID: 9517.1158951960@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes:
> Ahh, ok, I didn't realize that the total lock space was larger than
> what's being exposed today. That means we can easily add that stuff in
> the future and not break anything, which is all I was looking for.

Yeah --- in particular, we can always add more LOCKTAG values, or make
use of field4 values that are not possible with the current API.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2006-09-22 19:08:08 Re: advisory locks and permissions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-09-22 19:02:08 Re: advisory locks and permissions