On 9/14/17 08:23, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 9/13/17 09:56, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> Tom Lane wrote: >>>> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >>> >>>>> - Disallow DROP SUBSCRIPTION in a transaction under certain >>>>> circumstances, for example if a transaction has previously manipulated >>>>> the same subscription. >>> >>>> ISTM the second of those (refuse to drop an in-use subscription) is >>>> by far the least surprising behavior. >>> >>> +1 for that option. IIRC this has precedent for other object types such >>> as tables, where we refuse some action if we have already operated on >>> the table in the same transaction. >> >> What are some examples of such behavior? > > Search for CheckTableNotInUse() callers.
That one uses the relcache refcount, so we can't use that mechanism here. I think we need something based on xmin. The enum code has something like it, but I don't understand the details. -- 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
