| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Markus Wanner <markus(dot)wanner(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep |
| Date: | 2021-06-09 03:06:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1K8H3KBdsNmgyLxPTsh_wpYpJqjRbWPux1tfrSULicWdQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 6:24 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the updated patch.
>
> I have few comments:
> 1) Should we list the actual system tables like pg_class,pg_trigger,
> etc instead of any other catalog table?
> User has issued an explicit LOCK on pg_class (or any other catalog table)
>
I think the way it is mentioned is okay. We don't need to specify
other catalog tables.
> 2) Here This means deadlock, after this we mention deadlock again for
> each of the examples, we can remove it if redundant.
> This can happen in the following ways:
> 3) Should [user] catalog tables be catalog tables or user catalog tables
> [user] catalog tables
>
The third point is not clear. Can you please elaborate by quoting the
exact change from the patch?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-06-09 03:21:36 | Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2021-06-09 02:51:29 | Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names |