> > A properly implemented user lock system would likely
> > maintain a global sequence shared by all lockable objects, tuple or
> > otherwise.
>
> That'd just be equivalent to require that user tables are created WITH
> OIDS, only the counter wouldn't be shared with system tables ... how
is
> that any better?
Well, oid is 32 bit and not guaranteed to be unique...therefore useless.
However by properly defined, I meant by the application. The server is
agnostic about user locks, a.k.a. 'application defined locks'.
Merlin
