Re: Update blocking a select count(*)?
От | Kevin Grittner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Update blocking a select count(*)? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4FDB4DF602000025000484FE@gw.wicourts.gov обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Update blocking a select count(*)? (Benedict Holland <benedict.m.holland@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Update blocking a select count(*)?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Benedict Holland <benedict.m.holland@gmail.com> wrote: > Is it a bug that the blocking process reported is the finial > process but really the process blocking the intermediate? What reported that? The PostgreSQL server doesn't report such things directly, and I don't know pgadmin, so I don't know about that tool. I wrote the recursive query on this page: http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Lock_dependency_information So if that reported anything incorrecly, please let me know so I can fix it. By the way, the example with the three connections would have been better had I suggested a BEGIN TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL REPEATABLE READ; on the third connection. With that, even if one or both of the transactions on the other connections committed, the third transaction's count should remain unchanged. -Kevin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: