| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock |
| Date: | 2011-04-27 20:24:42 |
| Message-ID: | 4DB87B8A.1040305@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27.04.2011 22:59, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> For correct serializable behavior in the face of concurrent DDL
> execution, I think that a request for a heavyweight ACCESS EXCLUSIVE
> lock might need to block until all SIREAD locks on the relation have
> been released. Picture, for example, what might happen if one
> transaction acquires some predicate locks, then commits (releasing
> its heavyweight lock on the table), and before concurrent READ WRITE
> transactions complete there is a CLUSTER on the table. Or a DROP
> INDEX. :-(
Hmm, could we upgrade all predicate locks to relation-level predicate
locks instead?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-04-27 20:28:32 | Re: make world fails |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-04-27 20:17:45 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Core Team |