[PATCHES] CREATE TRIGGER locking

Last year, I questioned why CREATE TRIGGER acquires an AccessExclusiveLock on its target table: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-03/msg00764.php Acquiring an ExclusiveLock should be sufficient: we can safely allow concurrent SELECTs on the table. (The -hackers thread

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] PQescapeIdentifier

Tom Lane wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hang on a second. Has someone considered the encoding issues this might suffer from, same as PQescapeString? That was the point I raised when I saw the commit. My advice is we shouldn't have PQescapeIdentifier at all.

Re: [PATCHES] CREATE TRIGGER locking

Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Last year, I questioned why CREATE TRIGGER acquires an AccessExclusiveLock on its target table: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-03/msg00764.php Acquiring an ExclusiveLock should be sufficient: we can safely allow concurrent SELECTs

[PATCHES] Draft patch for bug: ALTER TYPE ... USING(NULL) / NOT NULL violation

Attached is a rather hurried patch for Alexander Pravking's report that ALTER TABLE fails to check pre-existing NOT NULL constraints properly: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-07/msg00015.php It seems to work but I'm out of time to do more with it, and am leaving for Toronto in the