RE: (LOCK TABLE options) “ONLY” and “NOWAIT” are not yet implemented - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From
Subject RE: (LOCK TABLE options) “ONLY” and “NOWAIT” are not yet implemented
Date
Msg-id TYAPR01MB2896005A7BA10FEDD897B4E3C4AA9@TYAPR01MB2896.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: (LOCK TABLE options) “ONLY” and “NOWAIT” are not yet implemented  (bt21tanigaway <bt21tanigaway@oss.nttdata.com>)
Responses Re: (LOCK TABLE options) “ONLY” and “NOWAIT” are not yet implemented  (bt21tanigaway <bt21tanigaway@oss.nttdata.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
>Thank you for your feedback.
>I might have added whitespace when I was checking the patch file.
>I attach a new patch to this mail.
Thank you for the update!

>     else if (Matches("LOCK", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW") ||
>-             Matches("LOCK", "TABLE", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW"))
>+             Matches("LOCK", "TABLE", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW") ||
>+             Matches("LOCK", "ONLY", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW") ||
>+             Matches("LOCK", "TABLE", "ONLY", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW"))
I think this code is redundant, so I change following.
---
    else if (HeadMatches("LOCK") && TailMatches("IN", "ACCESS|ROW"))
---
I created the patch, and attached it. Do you think?

>> 2. The command "LOCK TABLE a, b;" can be executed, but tab-completion
>> doesn't work properly. Is it OK?
>It's OK for now.
>But it should be able to handle a case of multiple tables in the future.
OK. I agreed.

Regards,
Shinya Kato

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?