Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: > On 06/21/2012 06:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hm, I guess I've forgotten that one?
> See <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-01/msg00561.php> I didn't understand that then, and I still don't. The ALTER TABLE CLUSTER might need exclusive lock, but it's not going to hold the lock long enough to be an issue. I could see that there's a problem with identify_locking_dependencies believing that two CONSTRAINT items conflict (do they really?) but not convinced the CLUSTER aspect has anything to do with it. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
