Re: [HACKERS] docs: additional subsection for page-level locks in explicit-locking section
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: > >> This seems to make sense. Barring objection, I will commit this >> only in HEAD. Committed. > I'm inclined to think this is a slight improvement, just for the > sake of consistency with peer level information. You probably > already noticed, but the patch as submitted neglects to close the > prior sect2 block before opening the new one. Yes, thanks for pointing out that! Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] docs: additional subsection for page-level locks in explicit-locking section
Fujii Masao wrote: > This seems to make sense. Barring objection, I will commit this > only in HEAD. I'm inclined to think this is a slight improvement, just for the sake of consistency with peer level information. You probably already noticed, but the patch as submitted neglects to close the prior sect2 block before opening the new one. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] docs: additional subsection for page-level locks in explicit-locking section
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Michael Banck wrote: > Hi, > > While reading through the Explicit Locking section of the manual today, > I felt the last paragraph of section 13.3.2. (Row-level Locks) might > merit its own subsection. It talks about page-level locks as distinct > from table- and row-level locks. Then again, it is just one paragraph, > so maybe this was deliberate and/or rejected before (though I couldn't > find prior discussion off-hand). Proposed patch attached. This seems to make sense. Barring objection, I will commit this only in HEAD. Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[HACKERS] docs: additional subsection for page-level locks in explicit-locking section
Hi, While reading through the Explicit Locking section of the manual today, I felt the last paragraph of section 13.3.2. (Row-level Locks) might merit its own subsection. It talks about page-level locks as distinct from table- and row-level locks. Then again, it is just one paragraph, so maybe this was deliberate and/or rejected before (though I couldn't find prior discussion off-hand). Proposed patch attached. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Banck Projektleiter / Berater Tel.: +49 (2161) 4643-171 Fax: +49 (2161) 4643-100 Email: michael.ba...@credativ.de credativ GmbH, HRB Mönchengladbach 12080 USt-ID-Nummer: DE204566209 Hohenzollernstr. 133, 41061 Mönchengladbach Geschäftsführung: Dr. Michael Meskes, Jörg Folz, Sascha Heuer diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml index 12b7814..84501e0 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml @@ -1140,6 +1140,9 @@ ERROR: could not serialize access due to read/write dependencies among transact will result in disk writes. + +Page-level Locks + In addition to table and row locks, page-level share/exclusive locks are used to control read/write access to table pages in the shared buffer -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
