[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postgresql-general
Subject:    Re: [HACKERS] Lock compatibility matrix
From:       Tom Lane <tgl () sss ! pgh ! pa ! us>
Date:       2007-01-31 22:01:13
Message-ID: 6976.1170280873 () sss ! pgh ! pa ! us
[Download RAW message or body]

Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
> Besides formatting improvements, it has addtional lock with
> temporary name UPDATE EXCLUSIVE (UE), which is the same as 
> EXCLUSIVE, but doesn't conflicts with SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE (SUE),
> which aquired by VACUUM and autovacuum. The reason for this is that
> at present we have no lock mode, which doesn't conflicts with *vacuum.
> The problem was described in thread 
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2006-12/msg01476.php
> What is the reason why we don't have such lock ?

I don't think the case was made that we need one.  There was certainly
nothing in that thread that I found convincing.  My opinion is we have
too many lock modes already ...

			regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]