On 2010-12-14 2:35 AM +0200, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 01:14 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
Oh, I forgot to mention. The patch doesn't change any existing
behaviour; the new behaviour can be invoked only by adding a new boolean
argument:
SELECT pg_advisory_lock(1, false);
Don't like adding a boolean. Nobody remembers what it is for and we have
bugs. How about pg_advisory_xact_lock()
That's the other option I was thinking of, but didn't like that too
much. But you're right about the boolean, it is a bit hard to remember
which behaviour is which.
The lock space is the same though, but I don't feel strongly about it.
Same lock space is good. Easy to separate if required.
Explicitly nameable lock spaces would be even better, since if multiple
applications use them you get strange and unmanageable contention.
I think something like this has been suggested in the past, and was
rejected at that time.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
