Pat Maddox wrote:
Sounds like theoretically it could matter, but in practice it doesn't. I'd like a more definite answer though.
Well, most of the locking issues with Slony seem to be with administrative commands (setting up a replication set, altering it) which require taking locks. If your application(s) lock tables in the order C,B,A and slony in A,B,C then they can deadlock waiting on each other. This is a problem you'll face any time you have two sets of exclusive locks interacting.
I'm fortunate in that the systems I deal with all allow for some downtime in application access, so I just schedule slony changes for these periods.
-- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
