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

Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'
Date: 2007-09-24 10:30:37
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 23:49 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On 6/19/07, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > related TODO items:
> > - add a WAIT n clause in same SQL locations as NOWAIT
> > - add a lock_wait_timeout (USERSET), default = 0 (unlimited waiting)
> >
> > to provide better control over lock waits.
> >
> are these actual TODO items? i can't find them on the TODO list and i
> don't remember any discussion nor patch about this

They are my proposals for TODO items to assist with application

Waiting around DDL is just one reason to want those, though there are
other similar issues with locking. I had one client with a program that
waited for 57 hours before they noticed. statement_timeout was not an
appropriate way to manage that and some form of timeout makes better
sense. NOWAIT means extra programming to handle that case, rather than
raising a normal error, so isn't always possible to change the app

  Simon Riggs

In response to


pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2007-09-24 14:15:01
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Eliminate more detoast copies for packed varlenas
Previous:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2007-09-24 09:07:20
Subject: Re: curious regression failures

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group