Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1K8H3KBdsNmgyLxPTsh_wpYpJqjRbWPux1tfrSULicWdQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
RE: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 6:24 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks for the updated patch. > > I have few comments: > 1) Should we list the actual system tables like pg_class,pg_trigger, > etc instead of any other catalog table? > User has issued an explicit LOCK on pg_class (or any other catalog table) > I think the way it is mentioned is okay. We don't need to specify other catalog tables. > 2) Here This means deadlock, after this we mention deadlock again for > each of the examples, we can remove it if redundant. > This can happen in the following ways: > 3) Should [user] catalog tables be catalog tables or user catalog tables > [user] catalog tables > The third point is not clear. Can you please elaborate by quoting the exact change from the patch? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: