On 2020/02/14 10:28, Amit Langote wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:39 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
On 2020/02/07 10:39, Amit Langote wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:16 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
Yes, so I will review your patch getting rid of
LOCK TABLE exception.
Attached updated patch.
Thanks! This patch basically looks good to me except
the following minor comment.
ROLLBACK;
-BEGIN;
-LOCK TABLE ONLY lock_tbl1;
-ROLLBACK;
RESET ROLE;
I think that there is no strong reason why these SQLs need to be
removed. We can verify that even "LOCK TABLE ONLY" command works
expectedly on the inherited tables by keeping those SQLs in the
regression test. So what about not removing these SQLs?
Hmm, that test becomes meaningless with the behavior change we are
introducing, but I am okay with not removing it.
Only this regression test seems to verify LOCK TABLE ONLY command.
So if we remove this, I'm afraid that the test coverage would be reduced.
However, I added a test showing that locking child table directly doesn't work.
Attached updated patch.
Thanks for updating the patch!
Barring any objection, I will commit the patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Advanced Platform Technology Group
Research and Development Headquarters
