Re: lock problem

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <berto(dot)d(dot)sera(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Rural Hunter" <ruralhunter(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Jerry Sievers" <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net>, <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: lock problem
Date: 2011-12-21 16:09:17
Message-ID: 4EF1B04D0200002500043F4C@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Rural Hunter <ruralhunter(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> I still have this question:
> same statement A,B,C,D update same row. The start order is
> A->B->C-D. From what I've gotten, B/C/D got the lock before A.
> Why did that happen?

Did you do anything to prevent it from happening? If not, the OS
scheduler is going to give time to one process or another in a
fairly unpredictable way.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-12-21 16:16:10 Re: stats and unix sockets
Previous Message Rural Hunter 2011-12-21 16:02:59 Re: lock problem