On 5/10/17 09:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Looking at 0001 and 0002... So you are correctly blocking nextval()
> when ALTER SEQUENCE holds a lock on the sequence object. And
> concurrent calls of nextval() don't conflict. As far as I can see this
> matches the implementation of 3.
>
> Here are some minor comments.
Committed after working in your comments. Thanks!
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services