From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Subject: | Re: Hot Standby and deadlock detection |
Date: | 2010-02-01 15:50:04 |
Message-ID: | 4B66F82C.7010007@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 09:40 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> The way this would work is if Startup waits on a buffer pin we
>>> immediately send out a request to all backends to cancel themselves if
>>> they are holding the buffer pin required && waiting on a lock. We then
>>> sleep until max_standby_delay. When max_standby_delay = -1 we only sleep
>>> until deadlock timeout and then check (on the Startup process).
>> Should wake up to check for deadlocks after deadlock_timeout also when
>> max_standby_delay > deadlock_timeout. max_standby_delay could be hours -
>> we want to detect a deadlock sooner than that.
>
> The patch does detect deadlocks sooner that that - "immediately", as
> described above.
Umm, so why not run the deadlock check immediately in
max_standby_delay=-1 case as well? Why is that case handled differently
from max_standby_delay>0 case?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-01 15:50:54 | Re: contrib\xml2 package's xpath_table function in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-01 15:46:10 | Re: Package namespace and Safe init cleanup for plperl UPDATE 3 [PATCH] |