Re: Additional Notes

Daniel Rinehart <danielr(at)neophi(dot)com> writes:
> Our callout use of NOTIFY within a TRIGGER may be tangential to the root
> cause. What we wanted to call out is that neither the NOTIFY page or the
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/explicit-locking.html page mention that
> NOTIFY uses an AccessExclusiveLock.

Like Laurenz, I don't see this as being tremendously important.
The lock does not conflict with any user-acquirable lock, and
since it's not a lock on a relation it doesn't wind up getting
propagated to standby servers. We only use it as a handy way
to serialize commit of transactions that are writing the NOTIFY
queue. If it were a lesser but still exclusive lock type,
it wouldn't make any difference.

explicit-locking.html is really only about locks on tables.
Maybe that should be clarified somewhere?

regards, tom lane