RE: locking [user] catalog tables vs 2pc vs logical rep
Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu) <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>
From: "osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com" <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>
To: 'Amit Kapila' <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Markus Wanner <markus.wanner@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2021-06-09T06:33:14Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday, June 9, 2021 12:06 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 6:24 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the updated patch. > > > > I have few comments: > > 1) Should we list the actual system tables like pg_class,pg_trigger, > > etc instead of any other catalog table? > > User has issued an explicit LOCK on pg_class (or any other catalog > > table) > > > > I think the way it is mentioned is okay. We don't need to specify other catalog > tables. Okay. > > 2) Here This means deadlock, after this we mention deadlock again for > > each of the examples, we can remove it if redundant. > > This can happen in the following ways: I think this sentence works to notify that commands described below are major scenarios naturally, to the readers. Then, I don't want to remove it. If you somehow feel that the descriptions are redundant, how about unifying all listitems as nouns. like below ? * An explicit <command>LOCK</command> on <structname>pg_class</structname> (or any other catalog table) in a transaction * Reordering <structname>pg_class</structname> by <command>CLUSTER</command> command in a transaction * Executing <command>TRUNCATE</command> on user_catalog_table > > 3) Should [user] catalog tables be catalog tables or user catalog > > tables [user] catalog tables > > > > The third point is not clear. Can you please elaborate by quoting the exact > change from the patch? IIUC, he means to replace all descriptions "[user] catalog tables" with "catalog tables or user catalog tables" in the patch, because seemingly we don't use square brackets to describe optional clause in normal descriptions(like outside of synopsis and I don't find any example for this). But, even if so, I would like to keep the current square brackets description, which makes sentence short and simple. Best Regards, Takamichi Osumi
Commits
-
Doc: Update caveats in synchronous logical replication.
- 4be39ef9cbc5 9.6.23 landed
- f365151a5392 10.18 landed
- e00e5db22d79 11.13 landed
- a73bd49c69e1 12.8 landed
- 7a4ecefe9d77 13.4 landed
- c66fb78ebb4f 14.0 landed
-
Document a few caveats in synchronous logical replication.
- acdb523cb642 9.6.23 landed
- ff33be61f212 10.18 landed
- 5a456034b84e 11.13 landed
- 9f7bba2629cf 13.4 landed
- eb231dbd80d2 12.8 landed
- 3cb828dbe260 14.0 landed
-
Update the docs and comments for decoding of prepared xacts.
- b4e3dc7fd420 14.0 landed
-
Allow decoding at prepare time in ReorderBuffer.
- a271a1b50e9b 14.0 cited
-
Documentation for logical decoding.
- 49c0864d7ef5 9.4.0 cited