On 28 July 2015 15:31, Craig Ringer Wrote:
>> 2. It should be allowed to deadlock with master transaction. >We >> need to work-out a solution to avoid deadlock. > >The deadlock case in autonomous tx's is a bit different. > >Assuming you don't intend to allow interleaving, where you can switch >between transactions at will rather than just at begin/commit, the only >way a deadlock can happen is when the outer tx holds a lock that the >inner tx tries to acquire. > >That should be practical to special-case by maintaining a list of parent >transaction (virtual?) transaction IDs. Attempts to wait on a lock held >by any of those should fail immediately. There's no point waiting for >the deadlock detector since the outer tx can never progress and >commit/rollback to release locks, and it might not be able to see the >parent/child relationship from outside the backend doing the nested tx >anyway. Thanks, sounds to be a good idea. I shall evaluate the same. Thanks and Regards, Kumar Rajeev Rastogi -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
