| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Seamus Abshere <seamus(at)abshere(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Non-overlapping updates blocking each other |
| Date: | 2017-10-16 13:24:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20171016132416.nado5ot4l6yhyndc@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Did you try using SELECT FOR NO KEY UPDATE instead of SELECT FOR UPDATE?
However:
Seamus Abshere wrote:
> My current theory is that, since the table is not clustered by id, rows
> with very distant ids get stored in the same page, and the whole page is
> locked during an update.
But we only lock one heap page at a time, not many, so it's hard to see
how that would deadlock.
> Or something.
Given your reluctance to share more details, it seems you'd have to do
with that explanation.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-10-16 13:55:54 | Re: Non-overlapping updates blocking each other |
| Previous Message | Seamus Abshere | 2017-10-16 12:20:37 | Re: Non-overlapping updates blocking each other |