Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Date
Msg-id 21924.1390855620@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Responses Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I haven't reviewed the patch, but -1 for adding a GUC.

> I'm pretty surprised that it's been suggested that some people might
> prefer AccessExclusiveLocks. Why would anyone prefer that?

For one thing, so they can back this out if it proves to be broken,
as the last committed version was.  Given that this patch was marked
(by its author) as Ready for Committer without any review in the current
CF, I can't say that I have any faith in it.
        regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Storing pg_stat_statements query texts externally, pg_stat_statements in core
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: new json funcs