Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> It's not? I agree with Tom here; this is just one of the numerous
>>> things you can do to screw up your database as a superuser. Why would
>>> you LOCK the pg_auth table, or any other system table for that
>>> matter, in the first place? Let alone in a distributed transaction.
>> Well, my test case arose from a real application scenario, not an 
>> attempt to destroy my database system.

> Why does the application LOCK pg_auth?

Even if there is a reason for a lock, surely it's not necessary to use
AccessExclusiveLock.  A lesser lock would synchronize whatever the heck
it's doing without locking out readers.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to