Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Silent deadlock possible in current sources

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Silent deadlock possible in current sources
Date: 2000-08-31 03:23:27
Message-ID: 116.967692207@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> writes:
>> Although this specific lockup mode didn't exist in 7.0.*, it does
>> suggest a possible cause of the deadlocks-with-no-deadlock-report
>> behavior that a couple of people have reported with 7.0: maybe there
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> is another logic path that allows a deadlock involving two 
>> buffer locks, or a buffer lock and a normal lock.  I'm on the
>> warpath now ...

> Buffer locks were implemented in 6.5.

Yeah, but we've only heard about silent deadlocks from people running
7.0.  I'm speculating that some "unrelated" 7.0 change is interacting
badly with the buffer lock management.  Haven't gone digging yet, but
I will.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dominic J. EidsonDate: 2000-08-31 04:18:20
Subject: More about "CREATE TABLE" from inside a function/trigger...
Previous:From: t-ishiiDate: 2000-08-30 23:40:12
Subject: Re: How to store unicode?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group