Re: "slow" queries
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: "slow" queries |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18268.1235959054@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: "slow" queries ("Cox, Brian" <Brian.Cox@ca.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
"Cox, Brian" <Brian.Cox@ca.com> writes: >> Probably because the DROP is trying to acquire exclusive lock on its >> target table, and some other transaction already has a read or write >> lock on that table, and everything else is queuing up behind the DROP. >> It's not a true deadlock that is visible to the database, or else >> Postgres would have failed enough of the transactions to remove the >> deadlock. Rather, what you've got is some very-long-running transaction >> that is still making progress, or else is sitting idle because its >> client is neglecting to close it; and everything else is blocked behind >> that. > This "deadlock" finished after 18h and 48m. As there is only 1 select > on a table with 400 rows and 10 inserts into a separate partition than > the one being dropped, what could possible take 18:48 to do? [ shrug... ] You tell us. To me it sounds a whole lot like some client program sitting on an open transaction that has a nonexclusive lock on the table to be dropped. That transaction wasn't necessarily doing any useful work; it might have just been waiting on the client. At this point I suppose arguing about it is moot because the evidence is all gone. If it happens again, capture the contents of pg_locks and pg_stat_activity while things are still stuck. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: