On 2006-09-05, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> It's a pity we didn't have Abhijit's patch 6 weeks ago.
>
> Well, now that we have it, the question is whether we want to do
> anything with it. One problem is it lacks documentation.
>
> However, as I said, I'd really rather choose a new API altogether.

What about existing users?

> The main thing that seems to be lacking is a way to wait for a lock,

Is this a feature that people actually want or need?

Certainly exposing the lockmode as a magic number isn't ideal.

> And then there's the question of what to expose in the way of lock
> identifier options. What we've got now is "two int4's or an OID"
> which seems a bit random, not to mention that the key space overlaps
> in an undocumented fashion.

It is documented in the original README.user_locks.

--
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services