On 9/22/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is why I suggested we set aside some range of numbers that should
not be used. Doing so would allow adding a better-managed
numbering/naming scheme in the future.

the whole point about advisory locks is that the provided lock space
is unmanaged. for example, in the ISAM system I wrote which hooked
into the acucobol virtual file system interface, I used  a global
sequence for row level pessimistic locking but reserved the 48th bit
for table level locks.  This system was extremely effective.  on the
current system I'm working on I use them to lock sequence oid's plus a
high bit indicator for what i am doing.  in short, advisory locks are
application-defined in concept.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to