Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-07-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
Added to TODO: * Reduce locking requirements for creating a trigger http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00635.php --- Simon Riggs wrote: On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 16:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-13 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 16:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We have * relhasindex (bool) set by CREATE INDEX but not unset by DROP INDEX * relhasrules (bool) * reltriggers (int2) set by CREATE and DROP, since its an integer Right. If CREATE INDEX can

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-04 Thread Decibel!
On Jun 3, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 16:48 -0500, Decibel! wrote: On May 30, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 19:18 -0500, Decibel! wrote: Is there a reason that we can't add a trigger to a table while a select is running? This is a

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-04 Thread Tom Lane
Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok, I'll take a stab at such a list. Can anyone think of any reasons why CREATE TRIGGER couldn't get by with ShareLock? pg_class.reltriggers. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-04 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok, I'll take a stab at such a list. Can anyone think of any reasons why CREATE TRIGGER couldn't get by with ShareLock? pg_class.reltriggers. ISTM that we do this in many ways on pg_class, if we

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-04 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We have * relhasindex (bool) set by CREATE INDEX but not unset by DROP INDEX * relhasrules (bool) * reltriggers (int2) set by CREATE and DROP, since its an integer Right. If CREATE INDEX can take a Share lock and can update pg_class, why would it not

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-04 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 16:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We have * relhasindex (bool) set by CREATE INDEX but not unset by DROP INDEX * relhasrules (bool) * reltriggers (int2) set by CREATE and DROP, since its an integer Right. If CREATE INDEX can

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-03 Thread Decibel!
On May 30, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 19:18 -0500, Decibel! wrote: Is there a reason that we can't add a trigger to a table while a select is running? This is a serious pain when trying to setup londiste or slony. This is constrained by locking. There are a

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-06-03 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 16:48 -0500, Decibel! wrote: On May 30, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 19:18 -0500, Decibel! wrote: Is there a reason that we can't add a trigger to a table while a select is running? This is a serious pain when trying to setup londiste

Re: [HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-05-30 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 19:18 -0500, Decibel! wrote: Is there a reason that we can't add a trigger to a table while a select is running? This is a serious pain when trying to setup londiste or slony. This is constrained by locking. There are a subset of DDL commands that might be able to

[HACKERS] Change lock requirements for adding a trigger

2008-05-29 Thread Decibel!
Is there a reason that we can't add a trigger to a table while a select is running? This is a serious pain when trying to setup londiste or slony. -- Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828