Are SQL-language function lock ordering deadlocks solved in PostgreSQL 18?

From: Bernice Southey <bernice(dot)southey(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Are SQL-language function lock ordering deadlocks solved in PostgreSQL 18?
Date: 2025-10-06 14:15:20
Message-ID: CAEDh4nyqYHaG4dHT=p6yfXh3CgTfKzvVPbm19ag-3oYuCB2PMw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hi pgsql-general community,

I recently ran into deadlocks in a SQL-language function when,
confusingly, a first-line advisory lock didn't prevent them. I
leveled-up my troubleshooting skills on this one, but of course it was
well explained a decade ago [1]. As best I understand it, the later
locks are acquired first, during the upfront full parsing of
SQL-language functions. The fix is to use PL/pgSQL.

I'm wondering if the change in 18 to "Improve SQL-language function
plan caching" [2] fixes this? "for old-style SQL functions, it will
now work much as it does with PL/pgSQL functions, because we delay
parse analysis and planning of each query until we're ready to run
it."

I tried the simple test from the original mail [1] and indeed got
deadlocks in version 17, but not 18. Yet absence of evidence is not
proof of no race conditions.

This might be my favourite change in 18 [2], if I'm understanding it
right. I much prefer the install-time checking of SQL-language
functions, and the elegance of pure SQL. But I've been convinced the
performance benefit of plan caching gave PL/pgSQL the edge. Now I'm
not so sure.

Best regards, Bernice

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20150728162823.25043.27625%40wrigleys.postgresql.org
[2] https://postgr.es/c/0dca5d68d

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Klaver 2025-10-06 14:54:59 Re: Does Java 8 support drivers 42.2.19 and 42.7.6?
Previous Message Vladimir Sitnikov 2025-10-06 08:18:57 Re: Does Java 8 support drivers 42.2.19 and 42.7.6?