Re: Allowing ALTER TYPE to change storage strategy

Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 08:35:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> You'd need a moderately strong lock on each such table, which means
>> there'd be serious deadlock hazards. I'm dubious that it's worth
>> troubling with.

> Yeah, I don't plan to do this in v1 (and I have no immediate plan to
> work on it after that). But I wonder how is the deadlock risk any
> different compared e.g. to DROP TYPE ... CASCADE?

True, but dropping a type you're actively using seems pretty improbable;
whereas the whole point of the patch you're proposing is that people
*would* want to use it in production.

regards, tom lane