Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe

* Atri Sharma (atri.jiit@gmail.com) wrote:
> If its not the case, the user should be more careful about when he is
> scheduling backups to so that they dont conflict with DDL changes.

I'm not following this as closely as I'd like to, but I wanted to voice
my opinion that this is just not acceptable as a general answer.  There
are a good many applications out there which do DDL as part of ongoing
activity (part of ETL, or something else) and still need to be able to
get a pg_dump done.  It's not a design I'd recommend, but I don't think
we get to just write it off either.
Thanks,
    Stephen