From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |
Date: | 2020-02-14 21:10:35 |
Message-ID: | CAAaqYe8=Z81ScdO52hPSVRm7Wq9-teSdMh7ohEz3kYd-Xp-nzw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 9:24 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 10:22:28PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I always thought that create index concurrently was prevented from
> > running concurrently in a table by the ShareUpdateExclusive lock that's
> > held during the operation.
>
> REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and CIC can deadlock while waiting for each other
> to finish after their validation phase, see:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190507030756.GD1499@paquier.xyz
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190507032543.GH1499@paquier.xyz
Michael,
Thanks for the cross-link. Do you think this would be valuable to
document at the same time? Or did you just want to ensure we were also
aware of this particular downfall? If the latter, I appreciate it,
it's helpful info. If the latter, let me know, and I'll try to update
the patch.
Thanks,
James
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | James Coleman | 2020-02-14 21:14:01 | Re: [DOC] Document auto vacuum interruption |
Previous Message | James Coleman | 2020-02-14 21:09:30 | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |