On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 06:07:34PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:56:33PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > I suppose it should something other than partition(ed), since partitions can be
> > partitioned, too...
> >
> > Attaching a partition acquires a <literal>SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE</literal>
> > lock on the parent table, in addition to
> > <literal>ACCESS EXCLUSIVE</literal> locks on the child table and the
> > <literal>DEFAULT</literal> partition (if any).
>
> In this context, "on the child table" sounds a bit confusing? Would
> it make more sense to say the "on the table to be attached" instead?
I guess you mean because it's not a child until after the ALTER. Yes, that
makes sense.
Thanks,
Justin