From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | William Scott Jordan <wsjordan(at)brownpapertickets(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Incr/Decr Integer |
Date: | 2009-07-16 18:30:56 |
Message-ID: | 200907162030.56434.andres@anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
On Thursday 16 July 2009 19:56:47 William Scott Jordan wrote:
> Hey all!
>
> Is there a better way to increase or decrease the value of an integer
> than doing something like:
>
> ---
> UPDATE the_table SET the_int = the_int + 1 WHERE the_id = 123 ;
> ---
>
> We seem to be getting a lot of deadlocks using this method under heavy
> load. Just wondering if we should be doing something different.
Is this the only statement in your transaction? Or are you issuing multiple
such update statements in one transactions?
I am quite sure its not the increment of that value causing the problem.
If you issue multiple such statements you have to be carefull. Example:
Session 1:
BEGIN;
UPDATE the_table SET the_int = the_int + 1 WHERE the_id = 1;
Session 2:
BEGIN
UPDATE the_table SET the_int = the_int + 1 WHERE the_id = 2;
Fine so far.
Session 1:
UPDATE the_table SET the_int = the_int + 1 WHERE the_id = 2 ;
Waits for lock.
Session 2:
UPDATE the_table SET the_int = the_int + 1 WHERE the_id = 1;
Deadlock.
Andres
PS: Moved to pgsql-general, seems more appropriate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2009-07-16 18:46:15 | Re: Incr/Decr Integer |
Previous Message | William Scott Jordan | 2009-07-16 17:56:47 | Incr/Decr Integer |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pitts | 2009-07-16 18:35:50 | Re: cluster index on a table |
Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2009-07-16 18:21:46 | Re: cluster index on a table |