Thread
Commits
-
doc: Mention the level of locks taken on objects in COMMENT
- 6fc08323b536 10.20 landed
- 44ab2dac12a7 11.15 landed
- e58345f5d110 12.10 landed
- 3ca40a2b18a0 13.6 landed
- a9009f59fff1 14.2 landed
- b2a76bb7d055 15.0 landed
-
COMMENT ON lock
nikolai.berkoff <nikolai.berkoff@pm.me> — 2022-01-18T14:11:52Z
I wanted to know what lock the COMMENT ON command took and I had to look in the source code, makes sense to me that it should be documented. I've also added it to the list of commands that take a SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock. Regards, Nikolai
-
Re: COMMENT ON lock
Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2022-01-18T14:37:35Z
On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 14:11 +0000, nikolai.berkoff wrote: > I wanted to know what lock the COMMENT ON command took and I had to look in the > source code, makes sense to me that it should be documented. I've also added > it to the list of commands that take a SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock. +1, but SHARE ACCESS EXCLUSIVE should be marked up with <literal>. Yours, Laurenz Albe
-
Re: COMMENT ON lock
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2022-01-19T04:45:07Z
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote: > On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 14:11 +0000, nikolai.berkoff wrote: >> I wanted to know what lock the COMMENT ON command took and I had to look in the >> source code, makes sense to me that it should be documented. I've also added >> it to the list of commands that take a SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock. > > +1. No objections to add more details for all that. Will fix. -- Michael
-
Re: COMMENT ON lock
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2022-01-20T08:01:07Z
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 01:45:07PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > No objections to add more details for all that. Will fix. And done as of b2a76bb. -- Michael