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

Re: Hot Standby and deadlock detection

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and deadlock detection
Date: 2010-02-01 15:50:04
Message-ID: 4B66F82C.7010007@enterprisedb.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 09:40 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> The way this would work is if Startup waits on a buffer pin we
>>> immediately send out a request to all backends to cancel themselves if
>>> they are holding the buffer pin required && waiting on a lock. We then
>>> sleep until max_standby_delay. When max_standby_delay = -1 we only sleep
>>> until deadlock timeout and then check (on the Startup process).
>> Should wake up to check for deadlocks after deadlock_timeout also when
>> max_standby_delay > deadlock_timeout. max_standby_delay could be hours -
>> we want to detect a deadlock sooner than that.
> 
> The patch does detect deadlocks sooner that that - "immediately", as
> described above.

Umm, so why not run the deadlock check immediately in
max_standby_delay=-1 case as well? Why is that case handled differently
from max_standby_delay>0 case?

-- 
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-02-01 15:50:54
Subject: Re: contrib\xml2 package's xpath_table function in PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-02-01 15:46:10
Subject: Re: Package namespace and Safe init cleanup for plperl UPDATE 3 [PATCH]

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