Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1226259461.27904.266.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 13:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > > On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 11:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > >>> 2. Also need to decide whether we want pg_class.reltriggers as int2 (as > >>> implemented here) or switch to relhastriggers as boolean. > >> > >> I'd go for changing the column name/type. Yeah, you will break any > >> clients that are still trying to manipulate reltriggers directly, but > >> better to break them obviously than non-obviously. And I think a silent > >> change in the column semantics has significant risk of the latter. > > > New version with column type change. > > I'm starting to review this now. It strikes me that while we are at it, > we should get rid of the useless pg_class columns relukeys, relfkeys, > and relrefs. These haven't been maintained since Berkeley days, and > this patch puts the final kibosh on any thought that we'd ever start > to maintain relukeys and relfkeys counts. > > Any objections? None here. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: