Reducing lock strength of adding foreign keys
От | Andreas Karlsson |
---|---|
Тема | Reducing lock strength of adding foreign keys |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5447578C.2050807@proxel.se обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Reducing lock strength of adding foreign keys
Re: Reducing lock strength of adding foreign keys |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, I have been thinking about why we need to grab an AccessExclusiveLock on the table with the PK when we add a foreign key. Adding new tables with foreign keys to old ones is common so it would be really nice if the lock strength could be reduced. A comment in the code claims that we need to lock so no rows are deleted under us and that adding a trigger will lock in AccessExclusive anyway. But with MVCC catalog access and the removal of SnapshotNow I do not see why adding a trigger would require an exclusive lock. Just locking for data changes should be enough. Looking at the code the only see the duplicate name check use the fact that we have grabbed an exclusive lock and that should work anyway due to the unique constraint, but since I am pretty new to the code base I could be missing something obvious. I have attached a proof of concept patch which reduces the lock strength to ShareLock. What do you say? Am I missing something? My gut feel also says that if we know it is a RI trigger we are adding then AccessShare should be enough for the PK table, since we could rely on row locks to prevent rows from being deleted. It would be really nice though if this was possible since this would make it possible to add a new table with foreign keys and data without locking anything more than the referred rows. Andreas
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: