Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?

Tom Lane a écrit :
> Jonathan Scher <js@oxado.com> writes:
>   
>> CLUSTER uses an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock. Why does it forbid concurrent reads?
>>     
>
> Because when it drops the old copy of the table there had better not be
> any concurrent readers.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
>
>   
Then, is it possible to take a share update exclusive lock until the new 
table is ready, then an access exclusive one only in order to switch 
tables? I don't think it's already coded like that...

Regards
Jonathan Scher