Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1pWhnF-0006X4-5I
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:00:09 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1pWhnD-0007xx-TG
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:00:07 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1pWhnD-0007xm-Kc
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:00:07 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1pWhn9-0007KK-6z
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:00:06 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 31RI01su391335;
	Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:00:01 -0500
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Cherio <cherio@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #17810: Update from 13.09 to 13.10 breaks SQLs with VACUUM
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKHqFkJfO3-TA4YL_O0yw8EaKTGY9+2HFAiRgHpEu8q1abvesg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17810-8eb7b4e1b7a68e1a@postgresql.org>
 <371962.1677515656@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAKHqFkJsF8TOm0UV+-4=M98hc_D5qqqxFu3AY-mOyKrPuMMswQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKHqFkJfO3-TA4YL_O0yw8EaKTGY9+2HFAiRgHpEu8q1abvesg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Cherio <cherio@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 27 Feb 2023 12:54:51 -0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <391333.1677520801.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:00:01 -0500
Message-ID: <391334.1677520801@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-bugs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-bugs>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/391334.1677520801%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Cherio <cherio@gmail.com> writes:
> I just realized that the ramifications of this change go further than just
> VACUUM related statements in the scripts. Assume 2 scripts

> UPDATE tableA
> UPDATE tableB

> and

> UPDATE tableA
> UPDATE tableB

> Before the change they could run in parallel without issues. After the
> change this will cause one of the queries to fail due to transaction locks.

Uh ... really?  Please provide evidence.  AFAIK this set of changes
only affects commands that are meant to not run inside tranaction blocks.

			regards, tom lane