Was this fixed? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of jue nov 18 15:31:16 -0300 2010: > > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue nov 18 15:11:37 -0300 2010: > > > > > In the current master branch, it appears that "ALTER TABLE c INHERIT > > > p" takes a ShareUpdateExclusiveLock on the child, which seems > > > sufficient, and an AccessShareLock on the parent, which seems like it > > > might not be; though I'm having a hard time figuring out exactly when > > > it wouldn't be, especially since in 8.4 I'm fairly sure any ALTER > > > TABLE command takes an AccessExclusiveLock. > > > > What if two of these run at the same time, and the parent doesn't > > have children when they start? They would both try to set > > relhassubclass, no? > > Yep, duplicated the issue that way. > > -- > ??lvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> > The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. > PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support > > -- > Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
