From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Devrim GUNDUZ" <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT and PostgreSQL 8.0 |
Date: | 2004-09-08 23:35:36 |
Message-ID: | NOEFLCFHBPDAFHEIPGBOIEBBCEAA.simon@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
DB2 8.2 now supports NOWAIT also... Best Regards, Simon Riggs
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Devrim GUNDUZ
> Sent: 08 September 2004 23:57
> To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: [HACKERS] SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT and PostgreSQL 8.0
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Hi,
>
> AFAIR there was a thread about "SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT" availability in
> {7.5,8.0}, 7-8 months ago.
>
> Now we have LOCK TABLE ... NOWAIT; but I wonder whether we'll have the
> SELECT ... NOWAIT one. Today I got a request for this; and it was
> reported that this feature will be used in a huge project.
>
> If there is an unapplied patch that I've missed (even though I didn't see
> one in http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches2) I'd like to
> know it -- taking all the risks, surely.
>
> Regards,
> - --
> Devrim GUNDUZ
> devrim~gunduz.org devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
> http://www.tdmsoft.com
> http://www.gunduz.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFBP44ttl86P3SPfQ4RAqC2AJoCeQrLeEdD6dE1S4mQO+gGRzsZxQCg2OM4
> dAWpHfXywbDS+dADccfGqCY=
> =1+Yy
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2004-09-09 00:34:32 | Re: Geometry regression test failure, CVS HEAD, Mac OS/X |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-09-08 23:26:35 | Re: FYI: Fujitsu |