| From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Soumyadeep Chakraborty <soumyadeep2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Ashwin Agrawal <ashwinstar(at)gmail(dot)com>, vanjared(at)vmware(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE SET ACCESS METHOD on partitioned tables |
| Date: | 2024-03-31 11:11:02 |
| Message-ID: | ZglExpzL9w0MtBWf@pryzbyj2023 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 12:00:00PM +0300, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> Hello Alvaro,
>
> 28.03.2024 18:58, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Grumble. I don't like initialization at declare time, so far from the
> > code that depends on the value. But the alternative would have been to
> > assign right where this blocks starts, an additional line. I pushed it
> > like you had it.
>
> I've stumbled upon a test failure caused by the test query added in that
> commit:
> +ERROR: deadlock detected
> +DETAIL: Process 3076180 waits for AccessShareLock on relation 1259 of database 16386; blocked by process 3076181.
> +Process 3076181 waits for AccessShareLock on relation 2601 of database 16386; blocked by process 3076180.
I think means that, although it was cute to use pg_am in the reproducer
given in the problem report, it's not a good choice to use here in the
sql regression tests.
--
Justin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2024-03-31 11:17:26 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
| Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2024-03-31 10:18:29 | Re: Security lessons from liblzma |