Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hcgBG-00077G-TG for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 01:11:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hcgAF-0008QO-UA for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 01:10:27 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hcgAF-0008QB-Ev for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 01:10:27 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hcgA8-0004FD-SY for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 01:10:26 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x5H1ADFM004828; Sun, 16 Jun 2019 21:10:13 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Alvaro Herrera cc: Oleksii Kliukin , pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: pgsql: Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock In-reply-to: <20190617004002.GA2726@alvherre.pgsql> References: <20190617004002.GA2726@alvherre.pgsql> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera message dated "Sun, 16 Jun 2019 20:40:02 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4826.1560733813.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2019 21:10:13 -0400 Message-ID: <4827.1560733813@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Alvaro Herrera writes: > On 2019-Jun-16, Tom Lane wrote: >> If you're going to push anything before tomorrow's wrap, please do it >> *now* not later. We're running out of time to get a full sample of >> buildfarm results. > Yeah, I had to bail out earlier today, so the only thing I'm confident > pushing now is a revert. Yeah, let's do that. I don't want to risk shipping broken code. We can try again for the next updates. regards, tom lane