Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL
Date: 2015-11-19 15:52:22
Message-ID: 20151119155222.GJ614468@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Janes wrote:
> I've written a function which allows users to clean up the pending list.
> It takes the index name and returns the number of pending list pages
> deleted.

I just noticed that your patch uses AccessShareLock on the index. Is
that okay? I would have assumed that you'd need ShareUpdateExclusive
(same as vacuum uses), but I don't really know. Was that a carefully
thought-out choice?

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-11-19 15:57:27 Re: [PROPOSAL] TAP test example
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-11-19 15:51:34 Re: [PATCH] Skip ALTER x SET SCHEMA if the schema didn't change