Re: Undetected Deadlock
От
Michael Harris
Тема
Re: Undetected Deadlock
Дата
Msg-id
CADofcAVRwzHnkvY9W370Qm9xiRJ0ttrvSkMK_DSx15TDyT=SVA@mail.gmail.com
Ответ на
Re: Undetected Deadlock (Michael Lewis)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Lewis <mlewis@entrata.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Lewis <mlewis@entrata.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Re: Undetected Deadlock Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
> I must be missing something. You mentioned dropping a partition, so is there an actual need for the delete? Could you detach concurrently and then drop the table or delete rows if needed? The DELETE is part of a transaction performing data loading. Our application allows data to be overwritten. Before using a COPY to actually store the new data, we do a DELETE to make sure there are no existing records. We tested a number of sequences and found that the most efficient is to perform a DELETE first, even though in most cases there is nothing to delete, and then do the COPY (rather than for example checking if it exists first and then deleting it). The DROP is part of a separate transaction that is doing the data expiry. Note that it is not dropping the same partition; old partitions get dropped, new data is loaded into newer partitions. Cheers Mike
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления