Re: [HACKERS] md.c is feeling much better now, thank you

> The window for problems is pretty small: you have to be within a
> transaction (otherwise the StartTransaction will notice the sinval
> report), and your very first query after the other backend does
> ALTER TABLE has to reference the altered table.  So I'm not sure
> this is worth worrying about.  But perhaps the parser ought to obtain
> the weakest possible lock on each table referenced in a query before
> it does any looking at the attributes of the table.  Comments?

Good question.  How do other db's handle such a case?  I hesitate to do
locking for parser lookups.  Seems live more lock overhead.


> I believe these changes ought to be committed into REL6_5 as well,
> but it might be wise to test them a little more in current first.
> Or would people find it easier to test them against 6.5 databases?
> In that case maybe I should just commit them now...

Seems it should be 6.6 only.  Too obscure a bug.  Could introduce a bug.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026