Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> We have
> * relhasindex (bool) set by CREATE INDEX but not unset by DROP INDEX
> * relhasrules (bool)
> * reltriggers (int2)  set by CREATE and DROP, since its an integer

Right.

> If CREATE INDEX can take a Share lock and can update pg_class, why would
> it not be theoretically possible for CREATE TRIGGER? 

It's (probably) theoretically possible, if we replace reltriggers with a
bool that acts more like relhasindex, ie it's a hint to go look in
pg_triggers.  My point was just that you can't arbitrarily decide that
some operation needs only a given strength of lock if you are not up to
speed on these sorts of details.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: Change lock requirements for adding a trigger at 2008-06-04 20:28:08 from Simon Riggs

Responses

• Re: Change lock requirements for adding a trigger at 2008-06-04 21:09:55 from Simon Riggs
• Re: Change lock requirements for adding a trigger at 2008-06-13 20:06:50 from Simon Riggs

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Pavel Stehule	Date: 2008-06-04 20:34:01
	Subject: Re: Proposal: new function array_init
Previous:	From: Pavel Stehule	Date: 2008-06-04 20:31:27
	Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS