On Thursday, May 03, 2012 06:12:04 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
> AFAICS you'd either use transactional or session level, but to use
> both seems bizarre. And if you really did need both, you can put a
> wrapper around the function to check whether a session level exists
> before you grant the transaction level lock, or vice versa.
I don't think at all that this is crazy. For queues it very well might make
sense for a dequeuing side to hold a lock in a session mode while the putting
side uses normal transaction scope (because its done inside a trigger or
such).
Andres
