From: | <Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <bt21tanigaway(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
Cc: | <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: (LOCK TABLE options) “ONLY” and “NOWAIT” are not yet implemented |
Date: | 2021-09-30 03:18:29 |
Message-ID: | TYAPR01MB2896005A7BA10FEDD897B4E3C4AA9@TYAPR01MB2896.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>Thank you for your feedback.
>I might have added whitespace when I was checking the patch file.
>I attach a new patch to this mail.
Thank you for the update!
> else if (Matches("LOCK", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW") ||
>- Matches("LOCK", "TABLE", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW"))
>+ Matches("LOCK", "TABLE", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW") ||
>+ Matches("LOCK", "ONLY", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW") ||
>+ Matches("LOCK", "TABLE", "ONLY", MatchAny, "IN", "ACCESS|ROW"))
I think this code is redundant, so I change following.
---
else if (HeadMatches("LOCK") && TailMatches("IN", "ACCESS|ROW"))
---
I created the patch, and attached it. Do you think?
>> 2. The command "LOCK TABLE a, b;" can be executed, but tab-completion
>> doesn't work properly. Is it OK?
>It's OK for now.
>But it should be able to handle a case of multiple tables in the future.
OK. I agreed.
Regards,
Shinya Kato
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
fix_tab_completion_of_lock.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.0 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-09-30 03:49:36 | Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ? |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-09-30 03:12:26 | Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress |