| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | CIC and deadlocks |
| Date: | 2007-03-31 12:15:57 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0703310515v443153efi49da147cc59780c7@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Isn't CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY prone deadlock conditions ?
I saw one with VACUUM today. But I think it can happen with other
commands like VACUUM FULL, CLUSTER, CREATE INDEX
CONCURRENTLY and so on. These commands conflict on the
ShareUpdateExclusiveLock held by CIC and hence would wait for
CIC to release the lock. At the same time, CIC would wait for these
transactions to complete.
We know that these commands are run in a separate transaction
and do not do any index fetches or inserts/updates. So in principle
CIC need not wait for these transactions to complete in any
of its waits. May be we can skip waits on the transactions that
are running one of these commands.
Is it something worth doing ?
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-03-31 13:14:36 | Re: CIC and deadlocks |
| Previous Message | Russell Smith | 2007-03-31 08:25:52 | Re: Feature thought: idle in transaction timeout |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-03-31 13:14:36 | Re: CIC and deadlocks |
| Previous Message | Russell Smith | 2007-03-31 08:15:45 | Re: COPY-able sql log outputs |