Re: parallel restore item dependencies - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: parallel restore item dependencies
Date
Msg-id 29892.1236826290@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to parallel restore item dependencies  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: parallel restore item dependencies  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> OK, I've worked out why I am seeing deadlocks etc. from parallel restore 
> on FK items.

> In my original patch, I looked at all the dependencies of a candidate 
> item ansd compared them with the dependencies of the running items to 
> see if there was a potential locking clash. However, Tom in his 
> admirable reworking of my patch, restricted the list of potential 
> clashing items (lockDeps) to "TABLE" items, if any. This would probably 
> have been ok if we hadn't just beforehand transferred all TABLE 
> dependencies in POST_DATA items to the corresponding TABLE DATA item. 
> The result is that we get empty lockDeps lists on all items - I'm 
> surprised we haven't had more complaints about deadlock or failing locks.

[ scratches head... ]  I coulda sworn I tested that when I was hacking
it.  I'm running low on steam tonight but will think more about this
tomorrow.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: KaiGai Kohei
Date:
Subject: Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1710)
Next
From: KaiGai Kohei
Date:
Subject: Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1710)