| From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: Reducing lock strength of trigger and foreign key DDL |
| Date: | 2015-02-08 01:05:46 |
| Message-ID: | 54D6B66A.20008@proxel.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/30/2015 07:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Looking at the latest patch, it seems that in
> AlterTableGetLockLevel(at)tablecmds(dot)c we ought to put AT_ReAddConstraint,
> AT_AddConstraintRecurse and AT_ProcessedConstraint under the same
> banner as AT_AddConstraint. Thoughts?
A new version of the patch is attached which treats them as the same for
locking. I think it is correct and improves readability to do so.
--
Andreas Karlsson
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| add-fk-lock-strength-v7.patch | text/x-patch | 173.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-02-08 01:18:55 | assessing parallel-safety |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-02-08 00:20:27 | Re: parallel mode and parallel contexts |