From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: locks in CREATE TRIGGER, ADD FK |
Date: | 2005-03-23 04:06:18 |
Message-ID: | 1420.1111550778@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> /*
> ! * Grab an exclusive lock on the pk table, so that someone doesn't
> ! * delete rows out from under us. (Although a lesser lock would do for
> ! * that purpose, we'll need exclusive lock anyway to add triggers to
> ! * the pk table; trying to start with a lesser lock will just create a
> ! * risk of deadlock.)
> */
> ! pkrel = heap_openrv(fkconstraint->pktable, AccessExclusiveLock);
> /*
> * Validity and permissions checks
> --- 3829,3839 ----
> Oid constrOid;
> /*
> ! * Grab a lock on the pk table, so that someone doesn't delete
> ! * rows out from under us; ShareRowExclusive should be good
> ! * enough.
> */
BTW, the above comment change is seriously inadequate, because it
removes the explanation of *why* that is the minimum required lock.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-23 04:07:45 | Re: locks in CREATE TRIGGER, ADD FK |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-23 04:03:36 | Re: locks in CREATE TRIGGER, ADD FK |