Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock
Date: 2008-11-12 00:07:19
Message-ID: 1226448439.27904.320.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 19:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

> The reason I was thinking about heap_lock_tuple is that it might provide
> a suitable defense against that case.

OK. Lock tuple works OK, but its the unlock that I'm worried about. How
would non-transactional un-lock tuple work?

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chuck McDevitt 2008-11-12 01:07:36 Re: Optimizing COPY
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2008-11-11 23:56:44 Re: failed test float8 on mingw