CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?

From: Jonathan Scher <js(at)oxado(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: CLUSTER, using SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock?
Date: 2007-03-01 13:55:35
Message-ID: 45E6DB57.6000107@oxado.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello,

CLUSTER uses an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock. Why does it forbid concurrent reads?
Florian G. Pflug, on a post (
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00081.php )
suggested that there were no way to let the old entry until the command
commit.
I would like Cluster to create a new table, copying old values to this
one, then delete the old one. This would allow Cluster to work with a
share update exlusive lock, in order to allow reading the table while
cluster is working.

How does Cluster actually works? Why making a Cluster command less
restrictive isn't even in the TO-list?

Best regards,
Jonathan Scher

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2007-03-01 14:00:52 HOT WIP Patch - version 4.0
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD 2007-03-01 13:52:16 Re: Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview