Hi!

Yes, I've checked that. What would be desirable behavior in the case above?
Anyway, waiting for table unlock seems to be not quite right.

On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 4:12 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 11:18:08AM +0300, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:
> > Is it intended? Why don't we perform vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation()
> > check for inheritors in expand_vacuum_rel()?
>
> Since no lock is held on the partition, the calls to functions like
> object_ownercheck() and pg_class_aclcheck() in
> vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation() will produce cache lookup ERRORs if the
> relation is concurrently dropped.
>
> --
> Nathan Bossart
> Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
>
>
>

-- 
Regards,
Nikita Malakhov
Postgres Professional
https://postgrespro.ru/

Reply via email to