Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> This is actually an issue though. Row-level shared locks would be
>> really nice to have for foreign-key handling. Right now we have to
>> use X locks for those, and that leads to deadlocking problems for
>> applications.
> Is the plan to allow one backend to shared lock the row while others can
> read it but not modify it, or is the idea to actually allow multiple
> backends to record their shared status on the row?
Plan? We have no plan to fix this :-(. But clearly there has to be
some way to tell which backends hold read locks on a shared-locked row,
else you can't tell if they've all dropped the lock or not.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
