From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Hao Wu <hawu(at)vmware(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY |
Date: | 2020-09-11 20:28:49 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoac4z96EpzYGjbz7NRN6FFtiVLV8qvXSk5o6F6fHgYP6A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:54 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Interesting example, thanks. It seems this can be fixed without
> breaking anything else by changing the planner so that it includes
> detached partitions when we are in a snapshot-isolation transaction.
> Indeed, the results from the detach-partition-concurrently-1.spec
> isolation test are more satisfying with this change.
Hmm, so I think the idea here is that since we're out-waiting plans
with the old partition descriptor by waiting for lock release, it's OK
for anyone who has a lock to keep using the old partition descriptor
as long as they continuously hold the lock. Is that right? I can't
think of a hole in that logic, but it's probably worth noting in the
comments, in case someone is tempted to change the way that we
out-wait plans with the old partition descriptor to some other
mechanism.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-09-11 20:42:10 | Re: problem with RETURNING and update row movement |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2020-09-11 20:23:21 | Re: Parallel worker hangs while handling errors. |