Re: tablecmds.c and lock hierarchy

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tablecmds.c and lock hierarchy
Date: 2015-08-04 18:05:55
Message-ID: CA+Tgmoa_CA19uE9+cKXUs3P=9xr=7eyP-LHT1oHpB6PM7jMWSA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:41 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yep, true as things stand now. But this would get broken if we add a
> new lock level between ShareRowExclusiveLock and AccessExclusiveLock
> that does not respect the current monotone hierarchy between those.

But we're probably not going to do that, so it doesn't matter; and if
we do do it, we can worry about it then. I don't think this is worth
getting concerned about now.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-08-04 18:09:41 Re: upgrade failure from 9.5 to head
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-08-04 17:56:02 Re: upgrade failure from 9.5 to head