From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Jun 3 21:45:59 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8DAB14CDF for ; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 21:45:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA22850; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 06:45:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id GAA81612; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 06:45:55 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 06:45:55 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund To: The Hermit Hacker Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sun Spurs Innovation in Supercomputing Message-ID: <19990604064554.B80950@bitbox.follo.net> References: <19990604054634.K77195@bitbox.follo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: ; from The Hermit Hacker on Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 01:40:36AM -0300 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 01:40:36AM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, Eivind Eklund wrote: > > Replacing the lock calls with calls to an API for a distributed lock > > manager. This allowed the use of PostgreSQL in high-availability > > clusters, with two machines sharing the same physical "disk" > > (actually, RAID array). > > Not quick sure how this applies (if it even does), but v6.5 of PostgreSQL > has had major changes done to it on its 'concurrency' code, to improve > locking...but I'm suspecting that its not 'client' locking you are talking > about here? No, it is not. I'm talking about using the same physical postgresql database with two concurrent postgresql processes running against it (the two different processes are on different machines, but the database is on shared physical media). Am I being clear now? Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message