На пт, 6.03.2020 г. в 21:00 Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> написа:
> Hi, > > On 2020-02-27 10:52:36 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > FWIW, I can't immediately think of a reason this would cause a problem, > > at least not on 9.4 and up which use MVCC catalog scans. If you're > > really still on 9.3 then it's notably more risky. In any case, I've > > not had any caffeine yet today, so this doesn't count for much. > > It likely could cause some problems if somebody concurrently executed > DDL affecting the same table. At least some "concurrently updated" > errors, and perhaps some worse ones. I'd at least add an explicit LOCK > TABLE on the underlying table that prevents concurrent catalog > modifications. > I am trying to escape the Access Exclusive lock over the table indeed, otherwise I would use the ALTER statement instead anyway, which makes a lock implicitly. Thanks for the responses. There is nobody else doing DDLs except me - Mr. DBA, so I guess I am safe on this side. ;) Cheers, -- Kouber Saparev
