Re: vacuum full problem

Stephan Szabo wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, pginfo wrote:
>
> > > > It is possible to be one not closed transaction, but in this case nobody will be
> > > > able to modify this table (tables) and
> > > > the system will stop to respond. The paradox is that the system works well without
> > >
> > > Not necessarily. People are going to be able to insert/update/delete from
> > > the tables (the locks are AccessShareLock) because those don't get a
> > > conflicting table lock. They're not going to be able to do things like
> > > vacuum full or alter table however because those do.
> > >
> >
> > Can you point me to any place in docs to read more detailed about locks and statistic (
> > I have idea, butt also I will to know more if possible).
>
> Well, for a list of the lock levels and some examples of where they're
> used you might want to see:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/static/explicit-locking.html
>

Thanks, it is good.regards,
ivan.

> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org