Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070810070740y1133e3f9q23f254f7617a422b@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
>> Urk... this seems pretty undesirable.
>
> OK, but please say what behaviour you would like in its place.
>
> Or are you saying you dislike this so much that you would prefer not to
> be able to run ALTER TABLE concurrently?

Personally, yes.  I work mostly with small databases where ease of
management is a lot more important than increased concurrency, and
"constraints almost always have unique names but you're not allowed to
rely on that in any queries or code because there is this one wierd
case that you probably will never hit where it might not be true"
doesn't sound like ease of management to me.  However, I hope we're
not forced into that choice, because this sounds like a great feature
otherwise.

....Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: doubts about toast_flatten_tuple_attribute/heap_form_tuple
Next
From: "Robert Haas"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery