Re: Lock conflict behavior?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Lock conflict behavior?
Date: 2009-01-22 23:20:53
Message-ID: 20486.1232666453@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 15:08 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> If we keep the permission check in LockTableCommand(), I can make a
>> patch that produces a more useful error message when the table is
>> removed right before the pg_class_aclcheck().

> Attached.

This is pretty horrid, because it converts any error whatsoever into
"relation does not exist". For counterexamples consider "statement
timeout reached", "query cancelled by user", "pg_class is corrupted",
etc etc.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-01-22 23:27:47 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Explicitly bind gettext to the correct encoding on Windows.
Previous Message Emmanuel Cecchet 2009-01-22 23:16:44 Re: Table Partitioning Feature