| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jason Petersen <jason(at)citusdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression |
| Date: | 2017-04-27 01:51:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRAovRHOTKaNeMkkKnEa2NqCd4jvoGsYaVg5xQaTSt5eA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2017-04-26 21:07:20 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> One thing we could do, since all catalog updates now go through
>> CatalogTupleUpdate(), is not use simple_heap_update() there but do the
>> heap_update() directly and provide a better user-facing error message.
>
> I think it's unacceptable to regress with an error message here. I've
> seen sequence DDL being used while concurrent DML was onging in a number
> of production use cases, and just starting to error out instead of
> properly blocking doesn't seem acceptable to me.
+1'ing on this argument.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-04-27 02:07:03 | Re: Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-04-27 01:12:58 | Re: Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-04-27 02:03:24 | Re: identity columns |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-27 01:38:38 | Re: Unportable implementation of background worker start |