* Fam Zheng (f...@redhat.com) wrote: > On Mon, 08/21 11:17, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > From previous discussions we've had, one suggestion was to have some > > type of 'safe' command; once issued in a thread, the monitor thread > > would only allow other lock-free commands to be issued; it stops any > > accidents of them issuing unsafe commands. > > I'm not sure I understand. If the 'safe' command is not issued, users are > allowed to do unsafe things? What are the possible consequences of those > 'unsafe' commands? Errors/hangs/crashes?
With or without the safe command no command could cause a crash. However, a command might try and take the bql and block waiting for it. With the 'safe' command only those commands that were declared as not-wanting the lock would be allowed. Dave > Fam -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
