Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Markus Wanner <markus(dot)wanner(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
Date: 2021-02-23 03:39:13
Message-ID: 20210223033913.wvqleng66zc2he5k@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2021-02-23 08:56:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:58 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > Perhaps all that we need to do is to disallow 2PC prepare if [user]
> > catalog tables have been locked exclusively?

> Right, and we have discussed this during development [1][2].

I remember bringing it up before as well... Issues like this really need
to be mentioned as explicit caveats at least somewhere in the code and
commit message. You can't expect people to look at 3+ year old threads.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com 2021-02-23 03:43:55 Tuples unbalance distribution among workers in underlying parallel select with serial insert
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-02-23 03:30:14 Re: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...)