Thread

Commits

  1. Clarify that pg_dump takes ACCESS SHARE lock

  1. pg_dump shared locks documentation

    Florin Irion <irionr@gmail.com> — 2022-03-15T14:19:47Z

    Hi, 
    
    In the `pg_dump` documentation we talk about "shared locks", but IIUC, we actually take `AccessShareLock`s. 
    This might be misunderstood with the `ShareLock`.
    
    There are 5 occurrences. 4 in `--jobs=njobs` and 1 in `--lock-wait-timeout=timeout` sections. 
    
    Cheers,  
    Florin Irion
  2. Re: pg_dump shared locks documentation

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> — 2022-03-15T15:06:57Z

    On 2022-Mar-15, Florin Irion wrote:
    
    > In the `pg_dump` documentation we talk about "shared locks", but IIUC,
    > we actually take `AccessShareLock`s.  This might be misunderstood with
    > the `ShareLock`.
    
    This might be a bit excessive to have in the main text.  What about
    adding a footnote to point out the exact lock level that is meant, with
    a link to the server doc page that explains each lock level?
    Something like this:
    
    >          Requesting exclusive locks on database objects while running a parallel dump could
    >          cause the dump to fail. The reason is that the <application>pg_dump</application> leader process
    > -        requests shared locks on the objects that the worker processes are going to dump later
    > +        requests shared locks<footnote>The precise lock level used is <literal>ACCESS SHARE</literal>.
    > +        See <xref ... /> for more information.</footnote> on the objects that the worker processes are
    >          going to dump later
    
    ...
    
    > @@ -870,7 +870,7 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
    >        <term><option>--lock-wait-timeout=<replaceable class="parameter">timeout</replaceable></option></term>
    >        <listitem>
    >         <para>
    > -        Do not wait forever to acquire shared table locks at the beginning of
    
    Same here.
    
    -- 
    Álvaro Herrera
    
    
    
    
  3. Re: pg_dump shared locks documentation

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2022-03-15T15:55:09Z

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
    > This might be a bit excessive to have in the main text.  What about
    > adding a footnote to point out the exact lock level that is meant, with
    > a link to the server doc page that explains each lock level?
    
    I dunno how well <footnote> will render in man-page format.
    How about just inserting a parenthetical remark at the first usage?
    
    ... leader process requests shared locks (ACCESS SHARE) on the ...
    
    Possibly we could make the "ACCESS SHARE" be a <link> without causing
    problems in man format.
    
    			regards, tom lane
    
    
    
    
  4. Re: pg_dump shared locks documentation

    Florin Irion <irionr@gmail.com> — 2022-03-15T22:21:41Z

    
    On 15/03/22 16:55, Tom Lane wrote:
    > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
    >> This might be a bit excessive to have in the main text.  What about
    >> adding a footnote to point out the exact lock level that is meant, with
    >> a link to the server doc page that explains each lock level?
    > 
    > I dunno how well <footnote> will render in man-page format.
    > How about just inserting a parenthetical remark at the first usage?
    > 
    > ... leader process requests shared locks (ACCESS SHARE) on the ...
    > 
    > Possibly we could make the "ACCESS SHARE" be a <link> without causing
    > problems in man format.
    > 
    > 			regards, tom lane
    
    Makes sense.
    I tried the footnote and in fact, it doesn't render well in the man page. It just adds a blank line(at least how I tried it).
    
    So, I made the link to ACCESS SHARE, pointing to section 13.3.1. "Table-Level Locks" , was this what you had in mind? 
    
    V2 attached. 
    
    Thank you for looking into this.
    Florin Irion
  5. Re: pg_dump shared locks documentation

    Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> — 2022-03-30T22:19:29Z

    On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 11:21:41PM +0100, Florin Irion wrote:
    > So, I made the link to ACCESS SHARE, pointing to section 13.3.1. "Table-Level Locks" , was this what you had in mind? 
    > 
    > V2 attached. 
    
    LGTM.  I've marked the commitfest entry as ready-for-committer.
    
    -- 
    Nathan Bossart
    Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com