Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Atri Sharma
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Date
Msg-id CAOeZVifj=icp8+0TGovWqr3WK7RNqPN5QsRtTrAfo2_1YuAQKw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view

 
> If its not the case, the user should be more careful about when he is
> scheduling backups to so that they dont conflict with DDL changes.

That is most certainly the wise choice.

> I am not too comfortable with exposing the locking type to the user. That
> may be just me though.

Why would that be a problem? Hard reasons, please.

Should we genuinely depend on the user's good judgement to decide the locking types?
--
Regards,
 
Atri
l'apprenant

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Next
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: UNION ALL on partitioned tables won't use indices.