Re: Add mention in docs about locking all partitions for generic plans

2025-04-05 Thread David Rowley
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 19:50, Tender Wang wrote: > > David Rowley 于2025年3月24日周一 05:28写道: >> This is no longer true in master, so if we do something here it's only >> v17 and earlier. > > In the case of [1], we still have AccessShareLock on entity_2, even though it > is pruned during initial part

Re: Add mention in docs about locking all partitions for generic plans

2025-04-05 Thread David Rowley
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 22:19, Tender Wang wrote: >> Maybe I was wrong about writing nothing in master's docs. It might >> still be important to detail this. I don't know the best way to phrase >> that, but maybe something along the lines of: "The query planner >> obtains locks for all partitions w

Re: Add mention in docs about locking all partitions for generic plans

2025-04-01 Thread David Rowley
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 12:19, David Rowley wrote: > I'll push these in the next few days unless anyone else wants to voice > their opinions. Thanks for the review. Pushed. David

Add mention in docs about locking all partitions for generic plans

2025-03-24 Thread David Rowley
Over in [1], there was some uncertainty about whether locking an unrelated partition was expected behaviour or not for the particular use-case which used a generic plan to scan a partitioned table and all of the partitions. I noticed that we don't mention this in the docs and though that perhaps w

Re: Add mention in docs about locking all partitions for generic plans

2025-03-24 Thread Tender Wang
David Rowley 于2025年3月24日周一 16:50写道: > On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 19:50, Tender Wang wrote: > > > > David Rowley 于2025年3月24日周一 05:28写道: > >> This is no longer true in master, so if we do something here it's only > >> v17 and earlier. > > > > In the case of [1], we still have AccessShareLock on entit

Re: Add mention in docs about locking all partitions for generic plans

2025-03-23 Thread Tender Wang
David Rowley 于2025年3月24日周一 05:28写道: > Over in [1], there was some uncertainty about whether locking an > unrelated partition was expected behaviour or not for the particular > use-case which used a generic plan to scan a partitioned table and all > of the partitions. > > I noticed that we don't m