Re: change in LOCK behavior - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: change in LOCK behavior
Date
Msg-id 20121011013428.GH11890@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: change in LOCK behavior  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: change in LOCK behavior  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 09:29:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 08:43:34PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think we have to revert and go back to the drawing board on this.
> 
> > Is reverting going to adversely affect users who are already using the
> > 9.2 behavior?
> 
> In what way would somebody be relying on the 9.2 behavior?

I don't know.  I am just asking if an application could be relying on
the 9.2 behavior.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: change in LOCK behavior
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Proof of concept: auto updatable views [Review of Patch]