Re: Alter index rename concurrently to - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Alter index rename concurrently to
Date
Msg-id 4aadd527-9986-36bd-978c-2300a95e7aec@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Alter index rename concurrently to  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Alter index rename concurrently to
List pgsql-hackers
On 31/07/2018 23:25, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> On 27/07/2018 16:16, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I also suspect that an appropriate fix might be to ensure that
>>> AcceptInvalidationMessages() is run at least once at the beginning of
>>> parse analysis.
> 
>> Why don't we just do that?
> 
> Don't we do that already?  Certainly it should get run in advance of
> any relation name lookup.  There is one at transaction start also,
> if memory serves.

Right, we do it at transaction start and when opening a relation with a
lock that you don't already have.  Which I suppose in practice is almost
equivalent to at least once per command, but you can construct cases
where subsequent commands in a transaction use the all same tables as
the previous commands, in which case they don't run AIM() again.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
Next
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: Problem while setting the fpw with SIGHUP