Re: Fwd: question on foreign key lock

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Filip Rembiałkowski <filip(dot)rembialkowski(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: question on foreign key lock
Date: 2012-12-06 00:13:40
Message-ID: 18461.1354752820@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:08 AM, Filip Rembiakowski
> <filip(dot)rembialkowski(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> 3. I made a naive test of simply changing AccessExclusiveLock to
>> ExclusiveLock, and seeing how many regression tests it breaks. It
>> breaks none :-)

> Sure. You could probably downgrade it quite a bit further without
> breaking the regression tests, but that doesn't mean it's safe in all
> cases.

In fact, since the regression tests make no attempt whatsoever to stress
DDL executed concurrently with table accesses, it doesn't prove a darn
thing. The standard regression tests actually try quite hard to avoid
such scenarios, so that the results will be repeatable. You could
perhaps build relevant test cases using the isolationtester
infrastructure, but I don't think anyone has tried particularly.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Henrik Kuhn 2012-12-06 09:13:43 ALTER EXTENSION UPDATE: How to update the 'module_pathname'?
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2012-12-05 23:51:54 Re: Trigger / constraint issue

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-12-06 00:33:02 Re: Dumping an Extension's Script
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-12-06 00:08:22 Re: Dumping an Extension's Script