On 9/17/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We have three possible choices for this: do nothing, install a bug-compatible, allegedly-clean-room implementation in contrib: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-09/msg00077.php or put a hopefully-cleaner design into core, eg per my suggestions here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg00467.php I favor the third alternative, mainly because by changing the API we remove all doubt as to whether any "intellectual property" remains from the original GPL'd code. However, we've got to make up our minds and get on with it.
two questions: do we need both a shared and unshared variant of advisory_unlock (im guessing no)? also, are we exposing the mode in the int4/int4 signature or are all advisory locks assumed to be exclusive (if yes, which int4 is the lockmode). merlin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
