> The name max_locks_per_transaction indicates a limit of some kind. The > documentation doesn't mention anything about whether that limit is > enforced > or not. > > I suggest the additional wording: > "This parameter is not a hard limit: No limit is enforced on the number of > locks in each transaction. System-wide, the total number of locks is > limited > by the size of the lock table."
I think it's worse than that. First of all, user locks persist outside of transactions, but they apply to this limit. A more appropriate name for the GUC variable would be 'estimated_lock_table_size_per_backend', or something like that. I've been putting some thought into reworking the userlock contrib module into something acceptable into the main project, a substantial part of that being documentation changes. Merlin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
