Re: [GENERAL] Concurrency problem building indexes

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Wes <wespvp(at)syntegra(dot)com>, Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Concurrency problem building indexes
Date: 2006-04-25 16:48:04
Message-ID: 20060425164804.GA27351@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I'm late to this thread, but maybe we can make the process of storing
the new data in pg_class take a lock using LockObject() or something
like that to serialize the access to the pg_class row. The idea would
be that this lock doesn't conflict with a LockRelation(), but it would
of course conflict with itself so no two CREATE INDEXES can enter that
code section concurrently.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-04-25 16:55:50 Re: FOR UPDATE lock problem ?
Previous Message David Wheeler 2006-04-25 15:57:11 Re: [HACKERS] Suggestion: Which Binary?