Re: Problem with ALTER TABLE - occasional "tuple concurrently updated"
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Problem with ALTER TABLE - occasional "tuple concurrently updated" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikiQWUBAa6hJNaosx=eUqorb+36Jr9Cw7XMdWB9@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Problem with ALTER TABLE - occasional "tuple concurrently updated" (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Problem with ALTER TABLE - occasional "tuple
concurrently updated"
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> > Was this fixed? >> >> Not yet. =A0I can probably fix it, if nobody else wants to do it. > > Well, it has languished for five months, so the "nobody else wants" part > is probably accurate. =A0;-) OK. Do we want to back-patch this, and if so how far? On the one hand, the symptom that OP is experiencing clearly sucks for him, but on the other hand upgrading the strength of a lock in releases that have been out in the field for a long time seems like an open invitation to have the villagers show up with pitchforks. Then again, ShareUpdateExclusiveLock doesn't interfere with routine queries, so maybe it's no big deal. Given that we have only one report, I'm inclined to just fix it in the master branch, but I could easily be talked into the other approach if someone wants to make an argument for it. --=20 Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: