Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 06:11:02 -0500
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
	Soumyadeep Chakraborty <soumyadeep2007@gmail.com>,
	Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	Ashwin Agrawal <ashwinstar@gmail.com>, vanjared@vmware.com
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE SET ACCESS METHOD on partitioned tables
Message-ID: <ZglExpzL9w0MtBWf@pryzbyj2023>
References: <202403281558.xk5pgf7ur3dq@alvherre.pgsql>
 <f3e61e27-19d0-5e40-3eb2-53282fa0532a@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <f3e61e27-19d0-5e40-3eb2-53282fa0532a@gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZglExpzL9w0MtBWf%40pryzbyj2023>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 12:00:00PM +0300, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> Hello Alvaro,
> 
> 28.03.2024 18:58, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Grumble.  I don't like initialization at declare time, so far from the
> > code that depends on the value.  But the alternative would have been to
> > assign right where this blocks starts, an additional line.  I pushed it
> > like you had it.
> 
> I've stumbled upon a test failure caused by the test query added in that
> commit:
> +ERROR:  deadlock detected
> +DETAIL:  Process 3076180 waits for AccessShareLock on relation 1259 of database 16386; blocked by process 3076181.
> +Process 3076181 waits for AccessShareLock on relation 2601 of database 16386; blocked by process 3076180.

I think means that, although it was cute to use pg_am in the reproducer
given in the problem report, it's not a good choice to use here in the
sql regression tests.

-- 
Justin