Re: Why is lock not released?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Why is lock not released? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 10661.1124511818@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Why is lock not released? (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Why is lock not released?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
>> The "drop" way probably allows slightly more concurrency, but given that
>> people should seldom be taking exclusionary locks on system catalogs,
>> I'm not sure this is really an issue.
> Hmm. The problem at hand (REASSIGN OWNED BY) may involve changing
> ownership of several objects in a single transaction. The order is
> unspecified, because it's following a scan of the pg_shdepend entries --
> so it'd be easy for one REASSIGN OWNED BY transaction to deadlock with
> another one, if they happen to follow different orderings.
Uh, how is it going to deadlock on a lock that is not exclusive?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: