Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jonathan Scher
Subject Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?
Date
Msg-id 45E70C19.9050808@oxado.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane a écrit :
> Jonathan Scher <js@oxado.com> writes:
>   
>> CLUSTER uses an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock. Why does it forbid concurrent reads?
>>     
>
> Because when it drops the old copy of the table there had better not be
> any concurrent readers.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
>
>   
Then, is it possible to take a share update exclusive lock until the new 
table is ready, then an access exclusive one only in order to switch 
tables? I don't think it's already coded like that...

Regards
Jonathan Scher


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Pavan Deolasee"
Date:
Subject: Re: HOT - preliminary results
Next
From: August Zajonc
Date:
Subject: Re: New feature request: FlashBack Query