Re: [Glue] Deadlock bug
| От | Kevin Grittner |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [Glue] Deadlock bug |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4C73288C0200002500034A9B@gw.wicourts.gov обсуждение исходный текст |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus wrote: >> the behavior was the same up to the second UPDATE on Process 2, at >> which point there was no deadlock. Process 2 was able to commit, >> at which point Process 1 failed with: >> >> ERROR: could not serialize access due to concurrent update > > Does this happen immediately, not waiting 2 seconds for deadlock > checking? The deadlock checking delay never comes into play. Process 2 would never be blocked, and Process 1 would fail on the COMMIT of Process 2. Without a detailed scenario I can't comment on exact behavior, but in a serializable-only environment, with SSI enforcement of RI, you can count on only having blocking on write/write conflicts, so it would only be a cycle of those which could ever cause a deadlock. Anything where deadlocks currently occur because of SELECT FOR SHARE or SELECT FOR UPDATE would not have the same deadlock issues. -Kevin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: