Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If so, what about increase the dead lock timer proportional to the
> length of the waiting holder queue?
I don't think that's a good idea; it's not solving the problem, only
reducing performance, and in a fairly arbitrary way at that. (The
length of the particular wait queue you happen to be on is no measure
of the total number of processes waiting for locks.)
The real problem is in the spinlock implementation --- deadlock checking
is only one place where lots of processes might gang up on the same
spinlock. The bufmgr lock is another one.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
