Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 3/8/17 04:12, Okano, Naoki wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> I have a feeling that this was proposed a few times in the ancient past
> >> but did not go through because of locking issues. I can't find any
> >> emails about it through. Does anyone remember? Have you thought about
> >> locking issues?
> > Is this e-mail you are finding?
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140916124537.GH25887%40awork2.anarazel.de
>
> No, that's not the one I had in mind.
I see. But I could only find it.
Would anyone know e-mails discussed about locking issues?
> > I am considering to add 'OR REPLACE' clause as a first step.
> > At least, I think there is no need to change the locking level when replacing a trigger with 'EXECUTE PROCEDURE'
clause.
> > In PostgreSQL, we currently have ShareRowExclusiveLock lock on relation on which trigger is created.
ShareRowExclusiveLockis enough to replace a trigger.
> > Also, we currently have RowExclusiveLock on pg_trigger. RowExclusiveLock is enough to replace a trigger, too.
>
> I'm not saying it's not correct. I was just wondering.
Thank you for your opinion!
I think we do not need to change locking level in this case.
If someone notice a mistake in my understanding, please point out it.
Regards,
Okano Naoki
Fujitsu
