Re: Reducing relation locking overhead

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Reducing relation locking overhead
Date: 2005-12-03 16:30:31
Message-ID: 438.1133627431@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Other than that case is there any other case the reindex could deadlock with?

Only SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-12-03 16:43:00 Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-12-03 16:29:43 Re: Reducing relation locking overhead