На пн, 9.03.2020 г. в 20:34 Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> написа:
> You'd not have to take an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE. A lower level would > suffice, e.g. SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE, which still allows data changes. > > > There is nobody else doing DDLs except me - Mr. DBA, so I guess I am > > safe on this side. ;) > > If autovacuum triggered a vacuum/analyze it'd would e.g. also try to > update pg_class. > I can so to say then use the strategy behind Peter Eisentraut's patch (reduce index rename locks) applied in version 12 in my case (9.3) manually. As far as I can see (and understand the source code), only the table holding the index is locked (and not pg_class). db=# begin; BEGIN db=*# lock table x in share update exclusive mode; LOCK TABLE db=*# update pg_class set relname = 'y_idx' where oid = 'x_idx'::regclass; UPDATE 1 db=*# commit; COMMIT It looks good. The only exceptional case I am able to discover is when the index is used within a constraint, in which case I should also update pg_constraint. Thank's again for the accurate responses. Regards, -- Kouber Saparev
