Some time ago we upgraded from v. 8.4.4 to 9.4.0 and we are seeing errors in 
some regression tests.

LOCATION:  exec_simple_query, postgres.c:887
ERROR:  40001: could not serialize access due to read/write dependencies among 
transactions

Detail can be one of these:
   DETAIL:  Reason code: Canceled on identification as a pivot, during commit 
attempt.
   DETAIL:  Reason code: Canceled on identification as a pivot, during write.
   DETAIL:  Reason code: Canceled on identification as a pivot, during conflict 
out checking.

Location is usually one of these:
   LOCATION:  PreCommit_CheckForSerializationFailure, predicate.c:4654
   LOCATION:  OnConflict_CheckForSerializationFailure, predicate.c:4600
   LOCATION:  CheckForSerializableConflictOut, predicate.c:3888

It may end up with
   ERROR:  25P02: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of 
transaction block


The database at this point is likely to have a barrage of read and write ops 
against few tables.
I understand that using serializable transaction we probably should be ready to 
retry,
but it would be helpful to understand why we did not see so many errors in the 
past.

  Did something changed from 8.4.4 to 9.4.0?
  Maybe Postgres has more aggressive predicate locking mechanism now?
  Can it be that because of the small table size it performs sequential scan 
and locks the entire table?

Sorry if any of these questions are plain stupid.
Thanks,
Michael.




This email and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may be confidential and/or 
privileged.

If you are not one of the named recipients or have received this email in error,

(i) you should not read, disclose, or copy it,

(ii) please notify sender of your receipt by reply email and delete this email 
and all attachments,

(iii) Dassault Systemes does not accept or assume any liability or 
responsibility for any use of or reliance on this email.

For other languages, go to http://www.3ds.com/terms/email-disclaimer

Reply via email to