From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Domagoj Smoljanovic <domagoj(dot)smoljanovic(at)oradian(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_restore causing deadlocks on partitioned tables |
Date: | 2020-09-14 15:24:51 |
Message-ID: | 1032969.1600097091@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2020-Sep-14, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, this seems related to 2ba5b2db7, but not the same thing.
>> Alvaro, any thoughts?
> So apparently when we go to restore the table data for the partition,
> the TRUNCATE deadlocks with the PK addition ... that's pretty odd;
> shouldn't the constraint restore have waited until the data had been
> fully loaded?
Yeah, that's certainly the design expectation. Missing dependency?
If memory serves, which it may not given my undercaffeinated state,
we would not expect there to be a direct dependency link between the
constraint and the table data "object". What there should be is
dependencies forcing the data to be restored before the post-data
boundary pseudo-object, and the constraint after the boundary.
I'm half guessing that that's being mucked up for partitioned tables.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2020-09-14 15:53:10 | Re: On login trigger: take three |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-09-14 15:20:03 | Subscription test 013_partition.pl fails under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS |