Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?

From: Jonathan Scher <js(at)oxado(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?
Date: 2007-03-01 17:23:37
Message-ID: 45E70C19.9050808@oxado.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane a écrit :
> Jonathan Scher <js(at)oxado(dot)com> writes:
>   
>> CLUSTER uses an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock. Why does it forbid concurrent reads?
>>     
>
> Because when it drops the old copy of the table there had better not be
> any concurrent readers.
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>
>
>   
Then, is it possible to take a share update exclusive lock until the new 
table is ready, then an access exclusive one only in order to switch 
tables? I don't think it's already coded like that...

Regards
Jonathan Scher

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: August ZajoncDate: 2007-03-01 17:48:31
Subject: Re: New feature request: FlashBack Query
Previous:From: Pavan DeolaseeDate: 2007-03-01 17:05:24
Subject: Re: HOT - preliminary results

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group