Re: Lock timeout detection in postgres 7.3.1

From: Christoph Haller <ch(at)rodos(dot)fzk(dot)de>
To: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: shariq77(at)yahoo(dot)com, lud_nowhere_man(at)yahoo(dot)com
Subject: Re: Lock timeout detection in postgres 7.3.1
Date: 2003-02-06 12:12:29
Message-ID: 3E42512D.D6014A75@rodos.fzk.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

> >
> > T1 (within psql):
> > BEGIN; DELETE FROM <some_table> ;
> > DELETE n
> >
> > T2 (within psql):
> > BEGIN; DELETE FROM <some_table> ;
> > <waiting forever>
> >
...
>
> I don't think there is a deadlock in the example
> given above. If I'm not mistaken a deadlock occurs if
> both transactions are waiting for each other to
> release the lock (i.e T1 waits for T2 to release
> locks/resources while T2 is also waiting for T1 to
> release locks/resources. In the above example, T1
> doesn't wait for T2 to do something before finishes
> the transaction (Only T2 is waiting for T1 to finish),
> hence the condition for deadlock is not met.
>
Yupp, I agree.
But from former DBMS I was dealing with,
I know this SET TIMEOUT called feature, which if properly set
terminated processes like that hanging on T2.
Is there something comparable within Postgres?

Regards, Christoph

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Julian Scarfe 2003-02-06 12:17:31 Re: TIME vs. TIMESTAMP data type
Previous Message Ludwig Lim 2003-02-06 12:08:51 Re: TIME vs. TIMESTAMP data type