On 4/7/16, sanhua.zh <sanhua.zh at foxmail.com> wrote: > > But I think lock a random byte from ?shared byterange? is enough to > implement the shared file lock. Locking whole 510 bytes may take a lower > performance. Why do you do so? >
On linux, the time needed to take a file lock is constant, regardless of how many bytes are locked. So there is no performance impact there. I assume other operating systems are similar. The locking protocol was designed in 2001 and cannot be changed because that would be a compatibility break. -- D. Richard Hipp drh at sqlite.org
