| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improving deadlock error messages |
| Date: | 2007-04-20 08:56:47 |
| Message-ID: | 87irbra0fk.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I don't think you've thought of quite all of the failure cases. One
> that's a bit pressing is that a deadlock isn't necessarily confined to
> objects in your own database.
We could do the syscache lookups for only the object we're waiting on and
store that information in the lock table for others to refer to. We would have
to do the syscache lookup either always or at the point where we first decide
we have to block.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Koichi Suzuki | 2007-04-20 09:13:52 | Re: [HACKERS] Full page writes improvement, code update |
| Previous Message | Marcin Waldowski | 2007-04-20 08:41:59 | Re: BUG #3242: FATAL: could not unlock semaphore: error code 298 |