gerry gan <xiang.gan.aalto@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Thanks for the comments! I have a naive question related to the use of > advisory lock. Based on my current reasoning about our scenario, consistent > ordering of commands in two transactions might not help to solve the > deadlock situation. If advisory lock is used, it can return false in case > it cannot get lock on certain row. This, however, might occur in both > transactions. Then it seems to be hard to continue from application side > since the operation is, by any means, required by application logic. In > other words, I guess this might cause 'deadlock' in applications. Do you > have any suggestions to solve this situation? And I'm sorry if my question > is naive. Thank you! A common answer to this sort of problem is to be willing to retry transactions after deadlock failures. If the deadlocks are common, maybe this won't be workable from a performance standpoint. But if they're rare, or you can tweak things to make them so, think about it. Retries can be a lot simpler, more robust, and even more performant than trying to get to a provably-deadlock-free implementation. regards, tom lane
