Re: Locking & concurrency - best practices

From: Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
To: andy <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>
Cc: Adam Rich <adam(dot)r(at)indigodynamic(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Locking & concurrency - best practices
Date: 2008-01-14 22:06:45
Message-ID: A5CE8F78-0F69-46EE-B1E4-C194CE7C2223@myemma.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


On Jan 14, 2008, at 3:54 PM, andy wrote:

> In our program we wrote the locking into the program, and created a
> modulelock table like:
>
> create table moduelock(
> userid int,
> module int,
> primary key (userid, module)
> )
>
> The program then locks things before it uses them... but we also
> have pretty low contention for modules.
>
> A lock is:
> begin
> insert into modulelock...
> commit;
>
> if commit ok, then go ahead. When we are done, delete from
> modulelock where ...

From what I can tell, this kind of roll-your-own application level
locking system is exactly what advisory locks are for. Search the
archives for the last couple of weeks as I remember someone posting
some really helpful functions to assist in using advisory locks.

Erik Jones

DBA | Emma®
erik(at)myemma(dot)com
800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888
615.292.0777 (fax)

Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style.
Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adam Rich 2008-01-14 22:57:43 Re: Locking & concurrency - best practices
Previous Message andy 2008-01-14 21:54:19 Re: Locking & concurrency - best practices