Re: [HACKERS] please? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pablo Funes
Subject Re: [HACKERS] please?
Date
Msg-id 199905312340.TAA03630@mancha.cs.brandeis.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] please?  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] please?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Sharing file systems.  Good point.  You could have a table you use to
> > > lock.  Lock the table, view the value, possibly modify, and unlock.
> > > This does not handle the case where someone died and did not remove
> > > their entry from the lock table.
> >
> > You can always write the modification time to the table as well and if
> > it's "too old", then try to override it.
> >
>
> Assuming you can set a reasonable "too old" time.
>

There may be many partial workarounds, depending on the
application, but there seems to be no robust way to have
a failed lock right now. Perhaps in a future version will
PQrequestCancel be able to terminate a waiting-for-lock
state?

Pablo

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] please?
Next
From: "D'Arcy" "J.M." Cain
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New IP address datatype