Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions
Date: 1999-12-01 10:37:18
Message-ID: 3844FA5E.EAFD86CF@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Oops sorry,I sent a draft by mistake.

Vadim Mikheev wrote:

> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > > I propose here that we stop the release of lock before end of transaction.
> > > I have been suffering from the early release of lock.
> > >
> > > Comments ?
> >
> > If there's no objection,I would change UnlockRelation() to not release
> > the specified lock except AccessShareLock.
>
> Why don't remove this call from improper places?
> I would try to find all calls and understand why
> they made...
>

I was surprized that few people really want DDL commands inside transactions.
Are there any reasons to releasing lock before end of transaction except
that long term lock for system tuples is not preferable ?

I think that UnlockRelation() is unnecessary fundamentally.
Mine is the simplest way to achieve this.
If there's no problem,I am glad to remove UnlockRelation() calls.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vadim Mikheev 1999-12-01 10:49:47 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions
Previous Message Vadim Mikheev 1999-12-01 10:28:36 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zeugswetter Andreas SEV 1999-12-01 10:47:49 AW: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions
Previous Message Vadim Mikheev 1999-12-01 10:28:36 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions