Re: XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobvNUMtE1Xz8z_R9gnZ-TXebfLif68WktLW7O-7R7gysA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Obtaining a tuple lock requires two separate actions: First we do > LockTuple() and then we do XactLockTableWait(). I think that's kind of a confusing way of looking at it. LockTuple() waits for a "tuple" lmgr lock, and XactLockTableWait waits for a "transaction" lmgr lock. Those two things are both part of a larger protocol for managing access to what we refer to as tuple locks at the SQL level. I don't think conflating those things would be a very good idea, because it's useful to know which phase you're currently doing - e.g. anybody waiting on a tuple lock is not first in the queue. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: