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

Re: [HACKERS] Lock freeze ? in MVCC

From: Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Lock freeze ? in MVCC
Date: 1999-04-27 10:48:30
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Now I'm suspicious about the following code in LockResolveConflicts().
>          /*
>          * We can control runtime this option. Default is lockReadPriority=0
>          */
>         if (!lockReadPriority)
>         {
>                 /* ------------------------
>                  * If someone with a greater priority is waiting for the
> lock,
>                  * do not continue and share the lock, even if we can.  bjm
>                  * ------------------------

You're right Hiroshi - this must be changed:

if we already have some lock with priority X and new requested
lock has priority Y, Y <= X, then lock must be granted.

Also, I would get rid of lockReadPriority stuff...

Bruce, what do you think?


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Vadim MikheevDate: 1999-04-27 10:52:41
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] JDBC and waiting for commit on a locked table in6.4.2
Previous:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 1999-04-27 10:24:07
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Lock freeze ? in MVCC

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