| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Date: | 2013-12-20 20:45:30 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobDYgwKfJSyDegjkHuLswU=x1v56ykP9jU-woLYmiZAUg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
> Hmm. If I understand the problem correctly, it's that as soon as another
> backend sees the tuple you've inserted and calls XactLockTableWait(), it
> will not stop waiting even if we later decide to kill the already-inserted
> tuple.
>
> One approach to fix that would be to release and immediately re-acquire the
> transaction-lock, when you kill an already-inserted tuple. Then teach the
> callers of XactLockTableWait() to re-check if the tuple is still alive.
That particular mechanism sounds like a recipe for unintended consequences.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-12-20 20:56:32 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-12-20 20:39:12 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |