Horton

Re: [HACKERS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Jason Petersen <jason@citusdata.com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-05-24T14:52:37Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Well, but then we should just remove minval/maxval if we can't rely on
> it.

That seems like a drastic overreaction to me.

> I wonder if that's not actually very little new code, and I think we
> might end up regretting having yet another inconsistent set of semantics
> in v10, which we'll then end up changing again in v11.

I'm not exercised enough about it to spend time on it or to demand
that Peter do so, but feel free to propose something.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Make ALTER SEQUENCE, including RESTART, fully transactional.

  2. Modify sequence catalog tuple before invoking post alter hook.

  3. Use weaker locks when updating pg_subscription_rel

  4. Add pg_sequence system catalog

  5. Modify sequence state storage to eliminate dangling-pointer problem