| From: | "Okano, Naoki" <okano(dot)naoki(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding the optional clause 'AS' in CREATE TRIGGER |
| Date: | 2017-03-08 09:12:20 |
| Message-ID: | 0B4917A40C80E34BBEC4BE1A7A9AB7E27ACAB4@g01jpexmbkw05 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I have a feeling that this was proposed a few times in the ancient past
> but did not go through because of locking issues. I can't find any
> emails about it through. Does anyone remember? Have you thought about
> locking issues?
Is this e-mail you are finding?
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140916124537.GH25887%40awork2.anarazel.de
I am considering to add 'OR REPLACE' clause as a first step.
At least, I think there is no need to change the locking level when replacing a trigger with 'EXECUTE PROCEDURE' clause.
In PostgreSQL, we currently have ShareRowExclusiveLock lock on relation on which trigger is created. ShareRowExclusiveLock is enough to replace a trigger.
Also, we currently have RowExclusiveLock on pg_trigger. RowExclusiveLock is enough to replace a trigger, too.
Regards,
Okano Naoki
Fujitsu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-03-08 09:27:41 | Re: dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-03-08 09:11:52 | Re: PATCH: psql show index with type info |