| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John Naylor <jcnaylor(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Delay locking partitions during INSERT and UPDATE |
| Date: | 2019-01-20 21:04:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f9beiqzppvh1e7tNeY-r186pX2V57N8H8MU_thDzSVH9Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 12:05, John Naylor <jcnaylor(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 11/22/18, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > If required, such operations could LOCK TABLE the top partitioned
> > table to block the DML operation. There's already a risk of similar
> > deadlocks from such operations done on multiple separate tables when
> > the order they're done is not the same as the order the tables are
> > written in a query, although, in that case, the window for the
> > deadlock is likely to be much smaller.
>
> Is this something that would need documentation anywhere?
Probably at least the release notes. I'm unsure where else to mention
it. I don't feel the workaround of using LOCK TABLE is special to
this case. The patch does, however, make it a possible requirement for
performing DDL on individual partitions where it was not previously.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2019-01-20 21:54:41 | Re: PSA: we lack TAP test coverage on NetBSD and OpenBSD |
| Previous Message | Kim Rose Carlsen | 2019-01-20 20:51:22 | Postgres doesn't remove useless join when using partial unique index |