From: | Jamey Poirier <jpoirier(at)exagrid(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgnube(at)gmail(dot)com" <pgnube(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #8290: broken/unexpected locking behavior |
Date: | 2013-07-09 19:06:14 |
Message-ID: | FA8A9A935BFD3A4D8F0CDA1C4F611BCC0C8642B7F2@IT-1874.Isys.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Thank you Alvaro. Yes, this explains it.
It doesn't help to fix it but at least I know now that it's a known "feature".
I'll have to see about coming up with a work-around as we likely won't get to 9.3 anytime soon.
Thank you!
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-bugs-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Herrera
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 2:59 PM
To: pgnube(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #8290: broken/unexpected locking behavior
pgnube(at)gmail(dot)com escribió:
> I sent the following information to pgsql-general to ask if it is
> expected locking behavior. The only responses that I got said that
> the behavior is reproducible on 9.1 and 9.3 beta 2.
> Nobody said that this is expected locking behavior and I believe it to
> be a bug, so I am filing this bug report.
> The exact steps on how to reproduce the problem are shown below.
> Thank you for putting together a great DB and for working on this bug report.
See here:
http://www.commandprompt.com/blogs/alvaro_herrera/2010/11/fixing_foreign_key_deadlocks/
There are further posts on the same topic in that blog. The patch dealing with it was finally committed for the 9.3 version, due to be released later this year:
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=0ac5ad5134f2769ccbaefec73844f8504c4d6182
At the bottom of the commit messages there are some message-ids on (rather long) discussions about that patch. You can search for them at http://www.postgresql.org/list/ (just enter the msgid in the box and click search).
If you try a 9.3 snapshot, you should be able to replace the FOR UPDATE in your queries with FOR NO KEY UPDATE and there should be no deadlock.
Even if it does not, I hope the aforementioned posts explain what is going on.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org) To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-07-09 19:20:56 | Re: BUG #8289: pg_stat_statements incorrect query text when executing multiple queries in a single PQexec |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-07-09 18:59:12 | Re: BUG #8290: broken/unexpected locking behavior |