Hi,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:49:06PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Realistically, if we want to prevent this type of problem, then all
> creation DDL will have to take a lock on each referenced object that'd
> conflict with a lock taken by DROP. This might not be out of reach:
> I think we do already take such locks while dropping objects. The
> reference-side lock could be taken by the recordDependency mechanism
> itself, ensuring that we don't miss anything; and that would also
> allow us to not bother taking such a lock on pinned objects, which'd
> greatly cut the cost (though not to zero).
Thanks for the idea (and sorry for the delay replying to it)! I had a look at it
and just created a new thread [1] based on your proposal.
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ZiYjn0eVc7pxVY45%40ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
