On Oct2, 2011, at 23:15 , Joe Abbate wrote: > I'm > somewhat surprised there appears to be no ability to lock a database > exclusively for something like pg_dump/pg_restore, so you're not > surprised by concurrent activity against the catalogs. I'm guessing the > assumption is that MVCC will take care of that?
I think the hope is more that it will, one day. Currently, postgres internally accesses the catalog with SnapshotNow, not with a MVCC snapshot. This is necessary to ensure, for example, that rows inserted into a table also get inserted into a newly created index. This wouldn't affects pg_dump if it only access the catalog via SQL, but it doesn't. pg_dump also depends on some server-side functions to do its work, and since these functions in turn use SnapshotNow-based internal backend functions, pg_dump essentially uses a mix of SnapshotNow and its transaction's MVCC snapshot. There has been talk about reducing the use of of SnapshotNow for catalog access, but AFAIK there's no concrete proposal, and certainly no patch, available. best regards, Florian Pflug -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
