On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 08:00:52PM +0200, Jim Jones wrote: > LGTM. It applies and builds cleanly, all tests pass and documentation also > builds ok. The CFbot seems also much happier now :)
+ /* + * Open and lock the relation. ShareLock is sufficient since we only need + * to prevent schema and data changes in it. The lock level used here + * should match catalog's reindex_relation(). + */ + rel = try_table_open(relid, ShareLock); I was eyeing at 0003, and this strikes me as incorrect. Sure, this matches what reindex_relation() does, but you've missed that CONCURRENTLY takes a lighter ShareUpdateExclusiveLock, and ShareLock conflicts with it. See: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/explicit-locking.html So, doesn't this disrupt a concurrent REINDEX? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
