| From: | Jerry Sievers <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Ok to flip pg_constraint.condeferrable on 9.1? |
| Date: | 2014-04-01 20:16:03 |
| Message-ID: | 86eh1gn6v0.fsf@jerry.enova.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hackers; as per $subject...
We have an FK defined on a table large enough and 24x7 as to make a
redefining of same constraint a painful solution.
Ran into a case where defining as deferrable initially immediate and
just running one batch job with deferred firing would solve a
concurrency problem that we discovered.
Grabbing a quick exclusive lock on the 2 related tables would not be a
problem if same might help avoid bad side-effects.
Developers are already working on a chunking solution to avoid the
long-running transaction that gave rise to this but I'd like to
consider this if it's not risky.
Comments?
--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres(dot)consulting(at)comcast(dot)net
p: 312.241.7800
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-04-01 20:49:52 | Re: get_fn_expr_variadic considered harmful |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-04-01 20:07:31 | Re: json/jsonb/hstore operator precedence |