Re: LISTEN and "tuple concurrently updated"

From: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LISTEN and "tuple concurrently updated"
Date: 2003-09-16 00:26:32
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.58.0309161022400.14143@linuxworld.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:

> Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > A user on IRC came across the following "tuple concurrently updated" error
> > when using LISTEN/NOTIFY intensively.
>
> I've applied a fix for this to CVS tip.

Great.

> I think that whenever we get around to rewriting LISTEN/NOTIFY to use
> shared memory messages instead of a table, it will be necessary to apply
> listen/unlisten commands that way (hold them until commit) to preserve
> transactional semantics. But for now, I'm not going to do the extra
> work.

I wasn't thinking about the deadlock/performance problems when I sent in
that patch. It was more a proof of my theory. I was certainly thinking
about the various discussions about reworking LISTEN/NOTIFY into
shared memory when looking at the code, but as you say, its not a job for
right now :-).

Thanks,

Gavin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-09-16 01:49:49 Re: FreeBSD Thread-safe functions ...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-09-15 23:46:29 Re: LISTEN and "tuple concurrently updated"