Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of jue nov 18 15:31:16 -0300 2010:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue nov 18 15:11:37 -0300 2010:
> > In the current master branch, it appears that "ALTER TABLE c INHERIT
> > p" takes a ShareUpdateExclusiveLock on the child, which seems
> > sufficient, and an AccessShareLock on the parent, which seems like it
> > might not be; though I'm having a hard time figuring out exactly when
> > it wouldn't be, especially since in 8.4 I'm fairly sure any ALTER
> > TABLE command takes an AccessExclusiveLock.
> What if two of these run at the same time, and the parent doesn't
> have children when they start? They would both try to set
> relhassubclass, no?
Yep, duplicated the issue that way.
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Andrey G.||Date: 2010-11-18 19:59:18|
|Subject: Re: BUG #5757: PL/PGSQL composite variable field error reporting|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2010-11-18 18:31:16|
|Subject: Re: Problem with ALTER TABLE - occasional "tuple concurrently updated"|