Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1K8H3KBdsNmgyLxPTsh_wpYpJqjRbWPux1tfrSULicWdQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep  (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>)
Responses RE: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 6:24 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the updated patch.
>
> I have few comments:
> 1) Should we list the actual system tables like pg_class,pg_trigger,
> etc instead of any other catalog table?
> User has issued an explicit LOCK on pg_class (or any other catalog table)
>

I think the way it is mentioned is okay. We don't need to specify
other catalog tables.

> 2) Here This means deadlock, after this we mention deadlock again for
> each of the examples, we can remove it if redundant.
> This can happen in the following ways:
> 3) Should [user] catalog tables be catalog tables or user catalog tables
> [user] catalog tables
>

The third point is not clear. Can you please elaborate by quoting the
exact change from the patch?



-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names