On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> More cleanup after failed reduced-lock-levels-for-DDL feature.
>
> Turns out that use of ShareUpdateExclusiveLock or ShareRowExclusiveLock
> to protect DDL changes had gotten copied into several places that were
> not touched by either of Simon's
More cleanup after failed reduced-lock-levels-for-DDL feature.
Turns out that use of ShareUpdateExclusiveLock or ShareRowExclusiveLock
to protect DDL changes had gotten copied into several places that were
not touched by either of Simon's original patches for the feature, and
thus neither he nor I
More cleanup after failed reduced-lock-levels-for-DDL feature.
Turns out that use of ShareUpdateExclusiveLock or ShareRowExclusiveLock
to protect DDL changes had gotten copied into several places that were
not touched by either of Simon's original patches for the feature, and
thus neither he nor I