Re: Exclusive lock for database rename - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew - Supernews
Subject Re: Exclusive lock for database rename
Date
Msg-id slrndmkpsv.g61.andrew+nonews@trinity.supernews.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Exclusive lock for database rename  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Exclusive lock for database rename  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2005-11-03, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Someone wanted to rename a database while someone else was running a
>> rather long pg_dump, so the rename had to wait, and everyone else had
>> to wait for the rename because no new connections would be allowed.
>
> As an auxiliary issue, why do the new connections have to wait in this
> case?  The rename waits for the AccessShareLock of the dump to be
> released, but meanwhile new connections should be able to get
> AccessShareLocks of their own.

No. New AccessShare locks block behind the pending AccessExclusive lock.
Otherwise AccessShare locks could starve the exclusive lock forever.

-- 
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches
Next
From: Andrew - Supernews
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data