From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Why is lock not released? |
Date: | 2005-08-19 18:35:38 |
Message-ID: | 20050819183538.GB15622@surnet.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 01:11:54PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > I just noticed that AlterSchemaOwner (and others like AlterFunctionOwner
> > -- I haven't checked anything else yet) does not release the lock on
> > pg_namespace (resp. AlterFunctionOwner) after it's done changing it. Is
> > there a reason for this?
>
> The code's a bit inconsistent about whether it releases non-exclusive
> locks on system catalogs or leaves them till transaction end. I suppose
> sometime we should try to make it consistent --- but as long as you're
> talking about non-exclusive locks, it doesn't really matter too much.
Ok, I'll change it where I find reasonable in my "drop owned by" patch.
(The locks are RowExclusive).
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
"Cuando mañana llegue pelearemos segun lo que mañana exija" (Mowgli)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-08-19 20:56:18 | enable_constraint_exclusion GUC name |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-08-19 17:21:03 | Re: SetOf Functions |