Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqHJK7H6g8+rMhyMtxjgXefzdEk2yKTdB3LCFdNMw4Ct+w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY  (Pavel Luzanov <p.luzanov@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY  (Pavel Luzanov <p.luzanov@postgrespro.ru>)
Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY  (Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 7:59 PM Pavel Luzanov <p.luzanov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> I found this in the documentation, section '5.11.3. Partitioning Using Inheritance'[1]:
> "Some operations require a stronger lock when using declarative partitioning than when using table inheritance. For
example,removing a partition from a partitioned table requires taking an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on the parent table,
whereasa SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock is enough in the case of regular inheritance." 
>
> This point is no longer valid with some restrictions. If the table has a default partition, then removing a partition
stillrequires taking an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock. 
>
> May be make sense to add some details about DETACH CONCURRENTLY to the section '5.11.2.2. Partition Maintenance' and
completelyremove this point? 
>
> 1. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/ddl-partitioning.html#DDL-PARTITIONING-USING-INHERITANCE

That makes sense, thanks for noticing.

How about the attached?

--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: gcc 11.1.0 warnings in llvmjit_expr.c
Next
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: Replication slot stats misgivings