On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Decibel! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ok, I'll take a stab at such a list. Can anyone think of any reasons > > why CREATE TRIGGER couldn't get by with ShareLock? > > pg_class.reltriggers.
ISTM that we do this in many ways on pg_class, if we believe the docs. We have * relhasindex (bool) set by CREATE INDEX but not unset by DROP INDEX * relhasrules (bool) * reltriggers (int2) set by CREATE and DROP, since its an integer Seems we should have one consistent way of adding associated objects. If CREATE INDEX can take a Share lock and can update pg_class, why would it not be theoretically possible for CREATE TRIGGER? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
