Re: Lock Tables Question

[Baron Schwartz]

David T. Ashley wrote:
> There is no concept that I'm missing.  I understand what a transaction is.
> But I just don't want to bothered.  My application is simple enough that
> bogarting the database until all necessary modifications have been made and
> the tables are again consistent is good enough.
> 
> Collisions are handled by serialization.  Period.  Somebody wins.  Everyone
> else waits.  Works for me.

Then the simplest possible thing to do (besides using transactions, which IMO would 
actually be a LOT less bother!) is use GET_LOCK('database_name').  That should handle 
your requirement to make locks 'database-local.'

In my experience, using LOCK TABLES becomes a spaghetti problem that begins to involve 
more and more things until you are going through *serious* contortions.  I would avoid 
it at all costs.

Baron