Simon, * Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 4 May 2016 at 16:45, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Why is it that we need to lock a table at all if we're just going to dump > > its ACL? > > We don't, but surely that's the wrong question.
I tend to agree with this, however... > If we don't lock it then we will have a inconsistent dump that will fail > later, if dumped while an object is being dropped. > Do we want an inconsistent dump? The dump won't be inconsistent, as Tom pointed out. The catalog tables are read using a repeatable read transaction, which will be consistent. > For what reason are we changing existing behaviour? There is no bug here, > as Stephen explained. > > So this is a behaviour change after freeze with uncertain purpose. This isn't accurate. We never locked tables in pg_catalog before, as we never looked at them, and that's currently the only case where the new logic will apply. We may change the behavior for --no-privileges (and perhaps other options) in the future to also have this logic apply, but I agree that's 9.7 material. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
