On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> AFAICS you'd either use transactional or session level, but to use
> both seems bizarre.
I'm a bit confused by all this, because we use both transaction and
session level locks internally - on the same lock tags - so I don't
know why we think it wouldn't be useful for user code to do the same.
In fact I'm a bit confused by the original complaint for the same
reason - if LockRelationOid and LockRelationIdForSession can coexist,
why doesn't the same thing work for advisory locks?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
