Re: [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqQ=yHXxiWU2FuaC13L_5y7UG7R_OkJhWQbXYMJPXCDtNg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression
Re: [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > On April 27, 2017 12:06:55 AM PDT, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >>On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> >>wrote: >>> More fun: >>> >>> A: CREATE SEQUENCE someseq; >>> A: BEGIN; >>> A: ALTER SEQUENCE someseq MAXVALUE 10; >>> B: SELECT nextval('someseq') FROM generate_series(1, 1000); >>> >>> => ignores maxvalue >> >>Well, for this one that's because the catalog change is >>transactional... > > Or because the locking model is borked. The operation actually relies heavily on the fact that the exclusive lock on the buffer of pg_sequence is hold until the end of the catalog update. And using heap_inplace_update() seems mandatory to me as the metadata update should be non-transactional, giving the attached. I have added some isolation tests. Thoughts? The attached makes HEAD map with the pre-9.6 behavior. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Вложения
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: