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 1pWhxs-000794-Ea
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:11:08 +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 1pWhxr-0003fH-5s
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:11:07 +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 1pWhxq-0003f8-Pp
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:11:06 +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 1pWhxo-0007PJ-Gx
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 18:11:05 +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 31RIB2au392517;
	Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:11:02 -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: 
 <CAKHqFkL3Ms6NzZ9_9UbpN3Qr0UKHdHisRH=JkeGYirYRhg0R7g@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>
 <391334.1677520801@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAKHqFkL3Ms6NzZ9_9UbpN3Qr0UKHdHisRH=JkeGYirYRhg0R7g@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Cherio <cherio@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:06:45 -0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <392515.1677521462.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:11:02 -0500
Message-ID: <392516.1677521462@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/392516.1677521462%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Cherio <cherio@gmail.com> writes:
> The second script should have tables used in the reversed order:
> UPDATE tableA
> UPDATE tableB

> and

> UPDATE tableB
> UPDATE tableA

> Since they will run in individual transactions tableA gets locked by the
> 1st script and tableB by the 2nd; as execution flow proceeds to the next
> update in each script, those tables would be locked in separate
> transactions.

I think you are working with a completely wrong mental model of what
this change did.  It will not affect a pipeline that doesn't contain
any VACUUM, ANALYZE, or similar maintenance commands.

			regards, tom lane