pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Event Triggers: adding information
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:35:41 +0100
Message-ID: <m2a9ryc49e.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmobn7g04hpybaHoDFGzeqE_nfRwYgHWk_5RoA+k2frG1pg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <m2txrsdzxa.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+Tgmob6kmAySE5yXvd3uE9LifHunufMg9iU3GmbJ5bpGPiHjQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2k3sbe51z.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+TgmoZjOACnHOKrz-eucj3FJXrYJzA-_yjSqajOQR8qkjCi=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2bodi55yn.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+TgmoZTxXGAkoyQD0aNOyju1X19SnVfk7KV9fsJCv63bS-C4g@mail.gmail.com>
	<m27go1ot1a.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<20130104205251.GB9191@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<m28v88pqin.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<20130109165829.GB4490@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<CA+TgmobykpymdGyfbCDEfS6+-50X-AKYTdK88fjMS4-mY5SBdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2ehhkrfqk.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+TgmobfeB_YpgMv5NjW52tG36Hg_DY=jq0XDkE5zwCstPQ4pg@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2pq14m7sx.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+TgmoYEW583z+oisToCYQMz2grzpavdXrCi3-W2D_+nucVhzQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2k3rbhh79.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+TgmoZYFhn=DyenBLr8KUZXYHtgjo-O8YE-7y61WKR6F05UQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<m21udesaz3.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+TgmoZPhj6Rw-DottwresCJnOmRewbOxp2AABwyxP2k7vZf-Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2622pmnnn.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
	<CA+Tgmobn7g04hpybaHoDFGzeqE_nfRwYgHWk_5RoA+k2frG1pg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Or maybe we should just silently ignore failures to look up the event
> trigger.  That might be better, because the DBA could always do:
>
> DROP FUNCTION myeventtrgfn() CASCADE;
>
> ...and it would be undesirable for other sessions to error out in that
> case due to SnapshotNow effects.

What about taking a lock on the functions we decide we will need to be
running, maybe a ShareUpdateExclusiveLock, so that the function can not
disappear under us from concurrent activity?

Note to self, most probably using:
	LockRelationOid(fnoid, ShareUpdateExclusiveLock);

After all, we might be right not to optimize for DDL concurrency…

Regards,
-- 
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (114+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <m2a9ryc49e.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>
Permalink:  ../m2a9ryc49e.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/m2a9ryc49e.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr

 · 

reply
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-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr, robertmhaas@gmail.com, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
  Subject: Re: Event Triggers: adding information
  In-Reply-To: <m2a9ryc49e.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr>

* 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