Re: select for update & lock contention - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: select for update & lock contention
Date
Msg-id 25109.1083845507@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to select for update & lock contention  ("Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net>)
Responses Re: select for update & lock contention  ("Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net>)
List pgsql-general
"Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net> writes:
> I think I'm seeing table-level lock contention in the following function

I think you're barking up the wrong tree entirely.  There's nothing in
that function that would acquire a conflicting table lock.

I'm wondering about foreign key lock contention, myself.  Look to what
the DELETE must do.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Ed L."
Date:
Subject: Re: select for update & lock contention
Next
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: Load Balancing and Backup