From: | Alvaro Herrera Munoz <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Adam Kavan <akavan(at)cox(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres Hanging on Inserts |
Date: | 2003-07-30 18:19:43 |
Message-ID: | 20030730181943.GD24539@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:03:55PM -0500, Adam Kavan wrote:
> I have found the problem (I think) below is the list of all the locks
> pending on the relation. The relation is a hash index on the table that is
> being INSERT'd rapidly. From what I can see pid 10024 and 10025 both have
> an ExclusiveLock on the index, and they both are waiting to get an
> ExclusiveLock on the relation.
Oh, so this is the problem. Truth is hash indexes in Postgres are known to
have poor concurrency, though I didn't expect them to be subject to
deadlocks... you should change the hash index to a btree index and the
problem will "go away"; you will also probably see a performance improvement
if there's concurrent insertion and access. BTrees are way more developed
than hashes.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[(at)]dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>)
"The ability to monopolize a planet is insignificant
next to the power of the source"
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dennis Gearon | 2003-07-30 18:39:25 | Re: Diff between contrib/dbmirror and rserv |
Previous Message | DeJuan Jackson | 2003-07-30 18:08:29 | Re: Minimal system (was Re: Basic questions before start) |