Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:57 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 4:27 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 8:41 AM osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com
> > <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Pushed!
> >
> [Responding to Simon's comments]
>
> > If LOCK and TRUNCATE is advised against on all user catalog tables, why would CLUSTER only apply to pg_class? Surely its locking
> > level is the same as LOCK?
> >
>
> Cluster will also apply to all user catalog tables. I think we can
> extend it slightly as we have mentioned for Lock.

OK, good.

> > The use of "[user]" isn't fully explained, so it might not be clear that this applies to both Postgres catalog tables and any user tables
> > that have been nominated as catalogs. Probably worth linking to the "Capabilities" section to explain.
> >
>
> Sounds reasonable.
>
> > It would be worth coalescing the following sections into a single page, since they are just a few lines each:
> > Streaming Replication Protocol Interface
> > Logical Decoding SQL Interface
> > System Catalogs Related to Logical Decoding
> >
>
> I think this is worth considering but we might want to discuss this as
> a separate change/patch.

Makes sense.

Thanks

--
Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/