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