RE: Good name for new lock type for VACUUM?

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Good name for new lock type for VACUUM?
Date: 2001-06-23 21:11:01
Message-ID: EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJIEBPEMAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
>
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Isn't it a better idea to have a separate 'SELF EXCLUSIVE' lock
> > which conflicts with only itself ?
>
> *Only* itself? What would that be useful for?

Isn't VacuumLock = RowExclusiveLock + SelfExclusiveLock
for the table ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-23 21:29:03 Re: Good name for new lock type for VACUUM?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-06-23 20:58:37 Re: AW: Re: [SQL] behavior of ' = NULL' vs. MySQL vs. Stand ards