Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views
| От | Yugo Nagata | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20171227233154.c84c2ede.nagata@sraoss.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views (Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
Hi, Attached is the updated patch. On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 10:07:48 +0900 (JST) Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > >> > It would be nice if the message would be something like: > >> > > >> > DETAIL: Views that return aggregate functions are not lockable > You could add a flag to view_query_is_auto_updatable() to switch the > message between > > DETAIL: Views that return aggregate functions are not automatically updatable. > > and > > DETAIL: Views that return aggregate functions are not lockable I didn't want to change the interface of view_query_is_auto_updatable() because this might be called from other third-patry software, so I renamed this function to view_query_is_auto_updatable_or_lockable() and added the flag to this. I created view_query_is_auto_updatable() as a wrapper of this function. I also made view_query_is_lockable() that returns a other message than view_query_is_auto_updatable(). > On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:59:05 +0900 (JST) > Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > > 1) Leave as it is (ignore tables appearing in a subquery) > > > > 2) Lock all tables including in a subquery > > > > 3) Check subquery in the view > > So it seem #1 is the most reasonable way to deal with the problem > > assuming that it's user's responsibility to take appropriate locks on > > the tables in the subquery. I adopted #1 and I didn't change anything about this. Regards, -- Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: