Re: [HACKERS] nonblocking lock? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] nonblocking lock?
Date
Msg-id 199906021533.LAA22273@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] nonblocking lock?  (Massimo Dal Zotto <dz@cs.unitn.it>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > Is it possible to do a nonblocking lock? That is, 
> > I want several clients to execute,
> > 
> >     begin
> >     if table A is locked
> >     then
> >         go around doing stuff on other tables
> >     else
> >         lock A and do stuff on A
> >     endif
> > 
> > the problem is, if I use normal lock, then 
> > after one client has locked and is doing stuff on A
> > the other one will block and thus it won't be able
> > to go around doing stuff on other tables. Is it
> > possible to do a nonblocking lock that will just
> > fail if the table is locked already? 
> 
> Try with user locks. You can find the code in contrib/userlocks.

Yes, this is the proper PostgreSQL solution.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Column name's length
Next
From: Dmitry Samersoff
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PID of backend