Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane escribió: >> It might be possible to solve this if we reduce the strength of the lock >> used for ALTER TABLE. We'd have to go through all the commands >> potentially issued by a pg_dump script and see if they could all be made >> to run concurrently with autovac, which is a bit nervous-making but >> might be feasible; and I'm afraid tablecmds.c would need some >> restructuring to not use the same lock type for every variant of ALTER. >> But it seems like a path worth investigating.
> Right. Are you going to work on it, or do you want me to propose a > patch? If you have time to work on it, please do. But it seems like you first need to do some investigation --- the idea may not work at all. In any case, this would still only fix things for pg_restore, and I remain concerned that people will gripe about autovacuum blocking locks. The idea of kicking autovac off tables remains probably more interesting in the long run. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate