On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 9:55 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Thinking more about this, the problem I noted previously about two of
> these solutions not working if the index scan node is not physically
> underneath the ModifyTable node actually applies to all three :-(.
> It's a slightly different issue for #2, namely that what we risk is
> first taking AccessShareLock and then upgrading to RowExclusiveLock.
> Since there are places (not many) that take ShareLock on indexes,
> this would pose a deadlock risk.
>
Can you be a bit more specific on what exact deadlock risk you are
seeing here as Amit L asked about it and I am also curious to know?
One way I could see is:
Session-1
begin;
Lock table foo in Access Share Mode;
Session-2
begin;
Lock table foo in Share Mode;
Session-1
Lock table foo in Row Exclusive Mode; --here it will wait for session-2
Session-2
Lock table foo in Access Exclusive Mode; --here it will lead to deadlock
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
