| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christian Kruse <christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire |
| Date: | 2014-01-02 09:55:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20140102095501.GA22496@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-01-02 01:40:38 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > I agree that the message needs improvement, but I don't agree that we
> > shouldn't lock the tuple's location. If you manually investigate the
> > situation that's where you'll find the conflicting tuple - I don't see
> > what we gain by not logging the ctid.
>
> I suppose so, but the tuple probably isn't going to be visible anyway,
> at least when the message is initially logged.
But that's the case for all these, otherwise we wouldn't wait on the
row.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-01-02 10:20:02 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-01-02 09:49:27 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |