Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Date
Msg-id 1308345410-sup-542@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie jun 17 17:08:25 -0400 2011:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > Hmm, would there be a problem if a scan on catalog A yields results from
> > supposedly-running transaction X but another scan on catalog B yields
> > result from transaction Y? (X != Y)  For example, a scan on pg_class
> > says that there are N triggers but scanning pg_trigger says N-1?
> 
> Yeah, I came to that same conclusion downthread.

Something is seriously wrong with my email :-(

-- 
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe