| From: | Yogesh Sharma <yogeshraj95(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Request to confirm which command is use for exclusive operation |
| Date: | 2017-03-08 10:42:50 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZUwCSK1JPEFwzmqQ--cG38VguQeTjpe=0SuPy4M-L=4SFhqg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Dear Albe,
Thanks for your support.
I observed there is some problem in REINDEX operation in older PostgreSQL
versions.
That why i want to add explicitly lock.
Regards,
Yogesh
On Wednesday, March 8, 2017, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
> Yogesh Sharma wrote:
> > I want to apply explicitly lock mechanism once inset operation is in
> progress then REINDEX will wait.
> > And vice versa.
> > So, please let me know this type of handling is possible.
>
> Maybe I misunderstand something, but you don't need to do that because it
> happens automatically.
>
> If you run REINDEX, it will take an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on the index
> before it starts its work.
>
> That means that it has to wait until all earlier INSERTing transactions are
> ended, and all INSERTs that come after the REINDEX will have to wait until
> the REINDEX is done.
>
> The database takes care that the data are consistent, so why would you
> want to do that explicitly?
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vick Khera | 2017-03-08 13:02:57 | Re: import CSV file to a table |
| Previous Message | hariprasath nallasamy | 2017-03-08 10:04:56 | too may LWLocks |