On 9/4/05, Christopher R. Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Unfortunately, that's not the case. The code that was being used when I > created ticket 1272 was very simple. In the main thread, I opened a > handle for each thread. Each thread then worked independently using > only their own handle. This broke the locking because the low-level > Linux file locks are tied to the thread that created them. That is, the > thread that opened the handle.. > > I meant a simpler case: a *single* handle per database per process. All threads share the same single handle but only one thread uses it at any time. There shouldn't be any inter-thread locking problems with this case.
Ron
