public inbox for [email protected]help / color / mirror / Atom feed
Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? 4+ messages / 2 participants [nested] [flat]
* Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? @ 2026-05-14 20:05 Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 2026-05-14 21:26 ` Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? David G. Johnston <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Ron Johnson @ 2026-05-14 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pgsql-admin <[email protected]> PG 17.9 BEGIN; ALTER TABLE x RENAME TO x_hold; ALTER TABLE y.x SET SCHEMA a; ALTER TABLE x OWNER TO foo; COMMIT; I don't trust the validity of synthetic tests when Prod is ill-behaved JDBC connections. -- Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce. Don't boil me, I'm still alive. <Redacted> lobster! ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? 2026-05-14 20:05 Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? Ron Johnson <[email protected]> @ 2026-05-14 21:26 ` David G. Johnston <[email protected]> 2026-05-15 01:03 ` Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: David G. Johnston @ 2026-05-14 21:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ron Johnson <[email protected]>; +Cc: Pgsql-admin <[email protected]> On Thursday, May 14, 2026, Ron Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > PG 17.9 > > BEGIN; > ALTER TABLE x RENAME TO x_hold; > ALTER TABLE y.x SET SCHEMA a; > ALTER TABLE x OWNER TO foo; > COMMIT; > > Define “transactionally safe”. > I don't trust the validity of synthetic tests when Prod is ill-behaved > JDBC connections. > > Then do them over a local connection using psql? David J. ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? 2026-05-14 20:05 Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 2026-05-14 21:26 ` Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? David G. Johnston <[email protected]> @ 2026-05-15 01:03 ` Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 2026-05-15 01:13 ` Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? David G. Johnston <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Ron Johnson @ 2026-05-15 01:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pgsql-admin <[email protected]> On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 5:26 PM David G. Johnston < [email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday, May 14, 2026, Ron Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> PG 17.9 >> >> BEGIN; >> ALTER TABLE x RENAME TO x_hold; >> ALTER TABLE y.x SET SCHEMA a; >> ALTER TABLE x OWNER TO foo; >> COMMIT; >> >> > Define “transactionally safe”. > Any open transactions will still see the original tables. > > >> I don't trust the validity of synthetic tests when Prod is ill-behaved >> JDBC connections. >> >> > Then do them over a local connection using psql? > The applications which I don't want to throw errors are ill-behaved JDBC connections. Sorry for the ambiguity. -- Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce. Don't boil me, I'm still alive. <Redacted> lobster! ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? 2026-05-14 20:05 Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 2026-05-14 21:26 ` Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? David G. Johnston <[email protected]> 2026-05-15 01:03 ` Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? Ron Johnson <[email protected]> @ 2026-05-15 01:13 ` David G. Johnston <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: David G. Johnston @ 2026-05-15 01:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ron Johnson <[email protected]>; +Cc: Pgsql-admin <[email protected]> On Thursday, May 14, 2026, Ron Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 5:26 PM David G. Johnston < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thursday, May 14, 2026, Ron Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> PG 17.9 >>> >>> BEGIN; >>> ALTER TABLE x RENAME TO x_hold; >>> ALTER TABLE y.x SET SCHEMA a; >>> ALTER TABLE x OWNER TO foo; >>> COMMIT; >>> >>> >> Define “transactionally safe”. >> > > Any open transactions will still see the original tables. > > That would involve locking, most DDL simply won’t happen while open transactions are using the objects. Normal visibility semantics then apply beyond that - which depend on isolation level. David J. ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-15 01:13 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-05-14 20:05 Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 2026-05-14 21:26 ` David G. Johnston <[email protected]> 2026-05-15 01:03 ` Ron Johnson <[email protected]> 2026-05-15 01:13 ` David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox