Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: Change lock requirements for adding a trigger
- From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
- To: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
- Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: Change lock requirements for adding a trigger
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 15:51:34 +0100
- Message-id: <1212159094(dot)4120(dot)114(dot)camel(at)ebony(dot)site>
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 19:18 -0500, Decibel! wrote: > Is there a reason that we can't add a trigger to a table while a > select is running? This is a serious pain when trying to setup > londiste or slony. This is constrained by locking. There are a subset of DDL commands that might be able to be performed with just an ExclusiveLock or ShareLock rather than an AccessExclusiveLock. Nobody has studied which sub-statements this might apply to, but its do-able since CREATE INDEX already does this. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
- References:
- Change lock requirements for adding a trigger
- From: Decibel!
- Change lock requirements for adding a trigger
- Prev by Date: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
- Next by Date: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
- Previous by thread: Change lock requirements for adding a trigger
- Next by thread: Sugestion: xpath
- Indexes: