Re: Additional Notes
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Additional Notes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 405270.1700154302@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Additional Notes (Daniel Rinehart <danielr@neophi.com>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
Daniel Rinehart <danielr@neophi.com> writes: > Our callout use of NOTIFY within a TRIGGER may be tangential to the root > cause. What we wanted to call out is that neither the NOTIFY page or the > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/explicit-locking.html page mention that > NOTIFY uses an AccessExclusiveLock. Like Laurenz, I don't see this as being tremendously important. The lock does not conflict with any user-acquirable lock, and since it's not a lock on a relation it doesn't wind up getting propagated to standby servers. We only use it as a handy way to serialize commit of transactions that are writing the NOTIFY queue. If it were a lesser but still exclusive lock type, it wouldn't make any difference. explicit-locking.html is really only about locks on tables. Maybe that should be clarified somewhere? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: