From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: zyake.mk4@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Required locks for ANALYZE
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:12:24 -0400
Message-ID: <6129.1566310344@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <156628723253.1296.7377373462603881976@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
References: <156628723253.1296.7377373462603881976@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> Therefore, in my opinion, the below paragraph should be amended as below.
> * Before
> -----
> ANALYZE requires only a read lock on the target table, so it can run in
> parallel with other activity on the table.
> -----
> * After
> -----
> ANALYZE requires only a SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock on the target table, so
> it can run in parallel with queries requiring ACCESS SHARE/ROW SHARE/ROW
> EXCLUSIVE locks such as SELECT, UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT on the table.
> -----
This does not really seem like an improvement. The second formulation is
pedantically correct, but also unintelligible.
Maybe we could make it say "run in parallel with non-DDL activity" ?
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, zyake.mk4@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Required locks for ANALYZE
In-Reply-To: <6129.1566310344@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox