Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend dependency and concurrent DDL issues in PG 8.3.x

2011-03-03 Thread Nikhil Sontakke
>> I see that all these issues have been fixed and committed by Tom via >> git commitid: 281a724d on 6th June, 2008. Was wondering why this fix >> is not in these supported branches like 8.3.13 for example. Kinda >> confused.. > > We don't usually back-patch such large changes. Oh ok. Thanks. Reg

Re: [HACKERS] pg_depend dependency and concurrent DDL issues in PG 8.3.x

2011-03-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Nikhil Sontakke wrote: > I see that all these issues have been fixed and committed by Tom via > git commitid: 281a724d on 6th June, 2008. Was wondering why this fix > is not in these supported branches like 8.3.13 for example. Kinda > confused.. We don't usually ba

[HACKERS] pg_depend dependency and concurrent DDL issues in PG 8.3.x

2011-03-03 Thread Nikhil Sontakke
Hi, Am referring to the following conversation: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-12/msg00190.php To summarize, in 8.3.x due to improper locking and concurrency issues in the DROP OBJECT codepath, for example if one tries to drop an index while dropping the table from another sessio