| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Get stuck when dropping a subscription during synchronizing table |
| Date: | 2017-06-20 23:10:00 |
| Message-ID: | d9b58273-2f88-dfbc-2299-aa49fc43a617@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/19/17 22:54, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> It seems to me we could just take a stronger lock around
>> RemoveSubscriptionRel(), so that workers can't write in there concurrently.
>
> Since we reduced the lock level of updating pg_subscription_rel by
> commit 521fd4795e3e the same deadlock issue will appear if we just
> take a stronger lock level.
I was thinking about a more refined approach, like in the attached
patch. It just changes the locking when in DropSubscription(), so that
that doesn't fail if workers are doing stuff concurrently. Everything
else stays the same.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-WIP-Parametrize-locking-in-RemoveSubscriptionRel.patch | text/plain | 3.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2017-06-20 23:19:50 | Re: pg_bsd_indent 2.0 is available from git.postgresql.org |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-06-20 22:56:45 | Re: Regarding Postgres Dynamic Shared Memory (DSA) |