Re: Declarative partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Declarative partitioning
Date
Msg-id 55D6100B.60300@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Declarative partitioning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 08/20/2015 06:19 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 06:58:24PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Do you mean ATTACH and DETACH, if they require access exclusive lock on
>> the parent, should not be in the first cut? Or am I misreading?
> 
> Sorry I was unclear.
> 
> ATTACH and DETACH should be in the first cut even if they require an
> access exclusive lock.
> 
> Cheers,
> David.

I don't see a way for them to *ever* not require an access exclusive lock.

We could eventually implement:

DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY

... but that's the only way I can see around it.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Using quicksort for every external sort run
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: TAP tests are badly named