Re: postgresql locks the whole table!

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Mike Mascari
Тема Re: postgresql locks the whole table!
Дата
Msg-id 3FD37662.80603@mascari.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: postgresql locks the whole table!  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Ответы Re: postgresql locks the whole table!  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-general
Greg Stark wrote:
> It's not strictly necessary to have a list of all xids at all. The normal
> "shared read lock" is just "take the write lock, increment the readers
> counter, unlock" Anyone who wants to write has to wait (using, eg, a condition
> variable) until the readers count goes to 0.
>
> This gets the right semantics but without the debugging info of a list of
> lockers. Other than debugging the only advantage I see to having the list of
> lockers is for deadlock detection. Is that absolutely mandatory?

What happens if a backend is killed and never decrements its reference
count?

Mike Mascari
mascarm@mascari.com


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: postgresql locks the whole table!
Следующее
От: Stephan Szabo
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: postgresql locks the whole table!