Dan Kennedy wrote:
From SQLite's point of view, locks are on a per file-handle basis. If
a unix process that uses sqlite has two file-handles open on the same
file (i.e. because the user has opened two separate connections with
two calls to sqlite3_open()), SQLite expects them to be able to
Joe Wilson wrote:
--- Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In implementing xLock in a VFS, do we need to worry
about lock counts, i.e. nested locking?
In other words, if a process asks for, say, a SHARED
lock, and he already has one, should we increment a
SHARED lock count? Or is it okay
Dan Kennedy wrote:
On 11/1/07, Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In implementing xLock in a VFS, do we need to worry
about lock counts, i.e. nested locking?
No. You don't need to worry about that.
In other words, if a process asks for, say, a SHARED
lock, and he already has one,
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 22:27 -0700, Joe Wilson wrote:
> After reading Dan's response, I must be mis-interpreting these comments.
I was a bit terse. See below.
> >
> > See comments for unixLock() and unixUnlock() in os_unix.c.
> >
> > /*
> > ** An instance of the following structure is allocated
After reading Dan's response, I must be mis-interpreting these comments.
Please ignore.
--- Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In implementing xLock in a VFS, do we need to worry
> > about lock counts, i.e. nested locking?
> >
> > In other
--- Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In implementing xLock in a VFS, do we need to worry
> about lock counts, i.e. nested locking?
>
> In other words, if a process asks for, say, a SHARED
> lock, and he already has one, should we increment a
> SHARED lock count? Or is it okay to just
On 11/1/07, Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In implementing xLock in a VFS, do we need to worry
> about lock counts, i.e. nested locking?
No. You don't need to worry about that.
> In other words, if a process asks for, say, a SHARED
> lock, and he already has one, should we increment
In implementing xLock in a VFS, do we need to worry
about lock counts, i.e. nested locking?
In other words, if a process asks for, say, a SHARED
lock, and he already has one, should we increment a
SHARED lock count? Or is it okay to just return,
i.e. to treat the request as a no-op?
Thanks,
-
8 matches
Mail list logo
