Jay Sprenkle uttered:
On 1/21/07, Andrew Teirney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What is a 'shared' lock? You can't share a lock, only one process
> > can own it at a time.
> >
>
> As per this document
>
> http://www.sqlite.org/lockingv3.html
>
> SHARED The database may be read but not
POSIX defines read and write locks. A write lock is exclusive and a
read lock inhibits a write lock from occurring. Any number of
processes/threads can have a read lock but as long as one read lock is
in place a write lock cannot be established. When a write lock is set
no read or write
Jay Sprenkle wrote
Sorry, Accidently hit send before I was finished. This documentation
needs
to be updated
so it makes sense. Making up this conceptual 'shared lock' thing instead of
explaining how
the locking mechanism really works is not helpful. A 'shared lock' in
reality is just opening
On 1/21/07, Andrew Teirney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What is a 'shared' lock? You can't share a lock, only one process can
> > own it
> > at a time.
> >
>
> As per this document
>
> http://www.sqlite.org/lockingv3.html
>
> SHARED The database may be read but not written. Any number of
>
On 1/21/07, Andrew Teirney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is a 'shared' lock? You can't share a lock, only one process can
> own it
> at a time.
>
As per this document
http://www.sqlite.org/lockingv3.html
SHARED The database may be read but not written. Any number of processes
can hold
Jay Sprenkle wrote:
On 1/21/07, Andrew Teirney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I appologise in advance if this is not the correct place to post this
query ...
I was just wondering whether there might be any particular reason why
there doesn't appear to be support for creating transactions that
On 1/21/07, Andrew Teirney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I appologise in advance if this is not the correct place to post this
query ...
I was just wondering whether there might be any particular reason why
there doesn't appear to be support for creating transactions that
acquire a shared lock on
I appologise in advance if this is not the correct place to post this
query ...
I was just wondering whether there might be any particular reason why
there doesn't appear to be support for creating transactions that
acquire a shared lock on execution of the BEGIN statement?
The reason why i
8 matches
Mail list logo
