Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Except I don't think this is taking an exclusive lock at all. The original
> > post had the deadlock detection fire on a SharedLock.
>
> Yeah, but it was a ShareLock on a transaction ID, which is the trace
> of s
Brendan Duddridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We do have foreign keys on other tables that reference the product table.
> Also, there will be updates going on at the same time as this update. When
> anyone clicks on a product details link, we issue an update statement to
> increment the click
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And what PG version is this? Alvaro fixed the
>> foreign-keys-take-exclusive-locks problem in 8.1 ...
> Except I don't think this is taking an exclusive lock at all. The original
> post had the deadlock detection fir
Hi,
Thanks for your replies.
We are using PostgreSQL 8.1.3 on OS X Server.
We do have foreign keys on other tables that reference the product
table. Also, there will be updates going on at the same time as this
update. When anyone clicks on a product details link, we issue an
update state
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What queries are those two processes executing? And what foreign keys do you
> > have on the product table or elsewhere referring to the product table? And
> > what indexes do you have on those columns?
>
> And what
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What queries are those two processes executing? And what foreign keys do you
> have on the product table or elsewhere referring to the product table? And
> what indexes do you have on those columns?
And what PG version is this? Alvaro fixed the
foreign-key
From: "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Cstdenis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] How can I make this query faster (resend)
> On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:56:49PM -0700, Cstdenis wrote:
> > (Its been a hour and I dont see my message on the li
Brendan Duddridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Further to my issue, the update never did finish. I received the following
> message in psql:
>
> ssprod=# update product set is_hungry = 'true' where date_modified >
> current_date - 10;
> ERROR: deadlock detected
> DETAIL: Process 18778 waits
Further to my issue, the update never did finish. I received the following message in psql:ssprod=# update product set is_hungry = 'true' where date_modified > current_date - 10;ERROR: deadlock detectedDETAIL: Process 18778 waits for ShareLock on transaction 711698780; blocked by process 15784.
Hi,Is Postgres supposed to be able to handle concurrent requests while doing large updates?This morning I was executing the following simple update statement that would affect 220,000 rows in my product table:update product set is_hungry = 'true' where date_modified > current_date - 10;But the app
10 matches
Mail list logo
