Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> writes:
> Ok, I'm wondering if this patch will cause problems locking a table
> that has had:
> CREATE RULE "_RETfoo" AS ON SELECT TO foo DO INSTEAD SELECT * FROM foo1;
> I need to be able to lock the table 'foo' exclusively while I swap
> out the underlying rule to forward to another table.
Uh, do you actually need any sort of lock for that?
Seems to me that if you do
BEGIN;
DELETE RULE "_RETfoo";
CREATE RULE "_RETfoo" AS ...;
COMMIT;
then any other transaction will see either the old rule definition
or the new one. No intermediate state, no need for a lock as such.
BTW, this seems to be a counterexample for my prior suggestion that
pg_class should have a "relviewrule" OID column. If it did, you'd
have to update that field when doing something like the above.
Pain-in-the-neck factor looms large...
regards, tom lane
