On 3/8/17 04:12, Okano, Naoki wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I have a feeling that this was proposed a few times in the ancient past >> but did not go through because of locking issues. I can't find any >> emails about it through. Does anyone remember? Have you thought about >> locking issues? > Is this e-mail you are finding? > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140916124537.GH25887%40awork2.anarazel.de
No, that's not the one I had in mind. > I am considering to add 'OR REPLACE' clause as a first step. > At least, I think there is no need to change the locking level when replacing > a trigger with 'EXECUTE PROCEDURE' clause. > In PostgreSQL, we currently have ShareRowExclusiveLock lock on relation on > which trigger is created. ShareRowExclusiveLock is enough to replace a > trigger. > Also, we currently have RowExclusiveLock on pg_trigger. RowExclusiveLock is > enough to replace a trigger, too. I'm not saying it's not correct. I was just wondering. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
