Horton

Re: ALTER INDEX .. RENAME allows to rename tables/views as well

Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, "Onder Kalaci" <onderk@microsoft.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-10-07T00:41:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On 10/6/21, 4:45 PM, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> On 2021-Oct-06, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> I think we should at least consider adding this check for ALTER INDEX
>> since we choose a different lock level in that case.
>
> I agree -- letting ALTER INDEX process relations that aren't indexes is
> dangerous, with its current coding that uses a reduced lock level.  But
> maybe erroring out is not necessary; can we instead loop, locking the
> object with ShareUpdateExclusive first, assuming it *is* an index, and
> if it isn't then we release and restart using the stronger lock this
> time?

Good idea.  Patch attached.

Nathan

Commits

  1. Ensure correct lock level is used in ALTER ... RENAME