On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:36:53 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Certainly not; indexes depend on locks, not vice versa. You'd not be >able to do that without introducing an infinite recursion into the >system design.
Wouldn't you have to face the same sort of problems if you spill part of the lock table to disk? While you do I/O you have to hold some lock. In either case there has to be a special class of locks that are pinned in memory. > In any case nbtree is much more heavyweight than we need >for this Having funcionality we don't need is not a showstopper ... unless heavyweight implies slow, which I have to admit may well be the case. Servus Manfred ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
