Re: FOR [SHARE|UPDATE] NOWAIT may still block in EvalPlanQualFetch

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FOR [SHARE|UPDATE] NOWAIT may still block in EvalPlanQualFetch
Date: 2014-02-03 06:31:11
Message-ID: 52EF37AF.10308@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02/01/2014 05:28 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 04:00:03PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> FOR SHARE|UPDATE NOWAIT will still block if they have to follow a ctid
>> chain because the call to EvalPlanQualFetch doesn't take a param for
>> noWait, so it doesn't know not to block if the updated row can't be locked.
>>
>> The attached patch against master includes an isolationtester spec to
>> demonstrate this issue and a proposed fix. Builds with the fix applied
>> pass "make check" and isolationtester "make installcheck".
>>
>> To reach this point you need to apply the patch in
>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51FB4305.3070600@2ndquadrant.com
>> first, otherwise you'll get stuck there and won't touch the code changed
>> in this patch.
>
> The above looks like a legitimate patch that was not applied:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51FB6703.9090801@2ndquadrant.com
>
> The patch mentioned in the text above was applied, I think.

The first patch, linked to in text, was commited as
706f9dd914c64a41e06b5fbfd62d6d6dab43eeb8.

I can't see the second in the history either. It'd be good to get it
committed, though the issue is obviously not causing any great outcry.

It was detected when testing a high-rate queueing system in PostgreSQL.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2014-02-03 06:42:08 Re: Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-02-03 06:13:05 Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT