| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Promise index tuples for UPSERT |
| Date: | 2014-10-01 19:59:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZR=tAs-TNioasca+ipUxMjWadre7V2maebgxAM93Zzj3Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
> XactLockTableWait() waits until the end of transaction, that's not you want
> here. If the backend that inserted the promise tuple decides to not proceed
> with the insertion, and removes the promise tuple, the backend waiting on it
> needs to be woken up more or less immediately, not when the transaction
> completes.
Simon has not been inconsistent here: he has said that deadlocks may
be possible. I happen to think that allowing them would be a major
mistake on our part, but that's another story.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-10-01 20:56:46 | Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-10-01 19:58:08 | Re: Promise index tuples for UPSERT |