| From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Referential Integrity and SHARE locks |
| Date: | 2007-02-05 16:26:37 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.64.0702051123150.2503@leary2.csoft.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> There are issues, yes. Dropping PKs is a very irregular occurrence nor
> is it likely to be part of a complex transaction. It wouldn't bother me
> to say that if a transaction already holds a RowExclusiveLock or a
> RowShareLock it cannot upgrade to an AccessExclusiveLock.
Actually, since rearranging PKs is such a drastic change I would expect
them only to be part of a large complex transaction. I know for apps I
work on it would be part of a single transaction script that updated
whole chunks of data and schema.
Kris Jurka
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2007-02-05 16:29:51 | Re: VC2005 build and pthreads |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-02-05 16:26:12 | Re: [HACKERS] Configuring BLCKSZ and XLOGSEGSZ (in 8.3) |