Re: unlink for DROPs after releasing locks (was Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: unlink for DROPs after releasing locks (was Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?)
Date: 2012-06-14 14:45:40
Message-ID: 7743.1339685140@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Is RESOURCE_RELEASE_AFTER_LOCKS actually used for anything? Is it
> just for extensions?

I'm too lazy to go look, but it certainly ought to be in use.
The idea is that that's the phase for post-lock-release cleanup,
and anything that can possibly be postponed till after releasing
locks certainly should be ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Phil Sorber 2012-06-14 14:57:39 Re: libpq compression
Previous Message Robert Haas 2012-06-14 14:37:08 Re: Backup docs