-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 256
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Feature] MSSQL
implementation of IDistributedLock
#3175
Comments
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 11, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 11, 2024
iancooper
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 11, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 12, 2024
preardon
added
3 - Done
and removed
0 - Backlog
good first issue
feature request
labels
Jul 12, 2024
preardon
added
0 - Backlog
good first issue
feature request
and removed
3 - Done
labels
Jul 22, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 25, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
preardon
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Since Brighter 9.8.0 there has been an
IDistributedLock
that is used to ensure that the Outbox Sweeper isn't running concurrently across nodes, I would like support for MsSql (or Perhaps Relational Database)Describe the solution you'd like
A MsSql provider for IDistributedLock
Additional context
A MsSql provider would pair well with the MsSql Outbox
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: