Re: BUG #13523: Unexplained deadlocks (possible race condition)
| От | Andres Freund | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #13523: Unexplained deadlocks (possible race condition) | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20150730083805.GA3161@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #13523: Unexplained deadlocks (possible race condition) ("Jack Douglas" <jack@douglastechnology.co.uk>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: BUG #13523: Unexplained deadlocks (possible race condition)
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-bugs | 
On 2015-07-30 09:23:10 +0100, Jack Douglas wrote:
> If parsing the INSERT aquires the RowExclusiveLock, perhaps parsing the LOCK
> statement should also aquire the lock? That would mean the following
> principle in the documentation ("...The best defense against deadlocks is
> generally to avoid them by being certain that all applications using a
> database acquire locks on multiple objects in a consistent order...",
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-DEAD
> LOCKS) would be possible (or at least more easily understood) when using
> SQL-language functions.
I don't think that'd help at all? The problem here is the lock upgrade
from RowExclusiveLock to the exclusive lock, and that'll not be fixed by
that proposal?
Regards,
Andres
		
	В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: