| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Review: Typed Table |
| Date: | 2010-01-28 15:34:19 |
| Message-ID: | 14397.1264692859@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> ISTM you should explicitly grab a lock on the of-type at some point, to
> make sure it doesn't get dropped while you're busy creating the table.
> How do we protect against that for the types used in columns?
We don't. There is no concept of a lock on a type.
For scalar types this is more or less irrelevant anyway, since a scalar
has no substructure that can be altered in any interesting way. I'm not
sure how hard we ought to work on making composites behave differently.
I think it's as likely to cause problems as solve them.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-28 15:39:33 | Re: Add on_perl_init and proper destruction to plperl [PATCH] |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-01-28 15:32:33 | Re: Review: listagg aggregate |