> > We definitely need some interlocking to handle this. For lack of better > > APIs, we could do a LockDatabaseObject() call in AccessShareLock mode on > the > > namespace and release the same on completion of the creation of the > object. > > > > Thoughts? > > In general, we've been reluctant to add locking on non-table objects > for reasons of overhead. You can, for example, drop a type or > function while a query is running that depends on it (which is not > true for tables). But I think it is sensible to do it for DDL > commands, which shouldn't be frequent enough for the overhead to > matter much.
Agreed. Especially if the race condition has non-trivial downsides as mentioned in the tablespace case. > When I rewrote the comment code for 9.1, I added locking > that works just this way, to prevent pg_description entries from being > orphaned; see the end of get_object_address(). > > Yeah thanks, that does the object locking. For pre-9.1 versions, we will need a similar solution. I encountered the issue on 8.3.x.. Regards, Nikhils
