Re: Bug? Concurrent COMMENT ON and DROP object

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Bug? Concurrent COMMENT ON and DROP object
Дата
Msg-id 11530.1278548983@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Bug? Concurrent COMMENT ON and DROP object  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar jul 06 22:31:40 -0400 2010:
>>> Hmm... so, maybe ShareUpdateExclusiveLock?
>> 
>> So COMMENT ON will conflict with (auto)vacuum? �Seems a bit weird ...

> Well, I'm open to suggestions...  I doubt we want to create a new lock
> level just for this.

[ shrug... ]  COMMENT ON is DDL, and most forms of DDL will conflict
with vacuum.  I can't get excited about that complaint.
        regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_dump and join aliases (was Re: [BUGS] ERROR: cannot handle unplanned sub-select)
Следующее
От: Cédric Villemain
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and comments to say bytes not kilobytes.