Re: Deadlock with ShareLocks?

From: Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Deadlock with ShareLocks?
Date: 2005-12-13 15:57:54
Message-ID: 200512131657.54984.mweilguni@sime.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Am Dienstag, 13. Dezember 2005 16:52 schrieb Tom Lane:
> Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> writes:
> > Since the type field is PK, there cannot be 2 rows with type='list', I
> > guess the deadlock must have some different explanation.
>
> Then the deadlock must involve rows in two different tables. What else
> are you doing in the same transaction(s) as updating last_modified?

That's what I think too, unfortunatly, I can't say for sure. The application
uses around 1000 different queries, and I had no logging on for this case. So
I guess two backends might have issued interleaved updates.

I think without logging this cannot be solved here.

Best regards,
Mario Weilguni

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-12-13 16:04:34 Re: Deadlock with ShareLocks?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-12-13 15:52:25 Re: Deadlock with ShareLocks?