My apologies,
After posting this and looking at how it appears I realised that line
wrapping makes the tables totally illegible.
Here they are again with all unnecessary columns removed and others shortened.
locktype | database | relation | pid | mode |
granted | waitstart | relation
----------+----------+------------+---------+---------------------+---------+-------------------------------+--------------------
relation | 529986 | 1842228045 | 2130531 | AccessShareLock | f
| 2022-01-19 00:32:32.626152+01 | st.ctr_table_efr_oa
relation | 529986 | 1842228045 | 2128603 | AccessExclusiveLock | t
| | st.ctr_table_efr_oa
relation | 529986 | 1842231489 | 2128603 | AccessExclusiveLock | f
| 2022-01-19 00:32:32.924694+01 | st.tpd_oa
relation | 529986 | 1842231489 | 2130531 | AccessShareLock | t
| | st.tpd_oa
pid | query_start | state_change | wait_event_type |
wait_event | query
---------+--------------------+--------------------+-----------------+------------+-------------------------------------------------------------
2128603 | 00:32:32.924413+01 | 00:32:32.924413+01 | Lock |
relation | DROP TABLE st.tpd_oa_18929
2130531 | 00:32:32.625706+01 | 00:32:32.625708+01 | Lock |
relation | DELETE FROM st.ctr_table_efr_oa_19010 WHERE ropid =
44788868
I hope this version is easier to read.
Cheers
Mike
On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 15:49, Michael Harris <harmic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hello Experts
>
> I'm hoping you will be able to help me with a tricky issue.
>
> We've recently updated our application to PG 14.1, and in the test instance we
> have started to see some alarming undetected deadlocks.
>
> An example of what we have seen is:
>
> locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid |
> transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction |
> pid | mode | granted | fastpath | waitstart
> | relation
> ----------+----------+------------+------+-------+------------+---------------+---------+-------+----------+--------------------+---------+-----------------+---------+----------+-------------------------------+--------------------------------
> relation | 529986 | 1842228045 | | | |
> | | | | 165/1941408 | 2130531 |
> AccessShareLock | f | f | 2022-01-19 00:32:32.626152+01 |
> st.ctr_table_efr_oa
> (1 row)
>
> locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid |
> transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction |
> pid | mode | granted | fastpath | waitstart |
> relation
> ----------+----------+------------+------+-------+------------+---------------+---------+-------+----------+--------------------+---------+---------------------+---------+----------+-----------+--------------------------------
> relation | 529986 | 1842228045 | | | |
> | | | | 75/2193719 | 2128603 |
> AccessExclusiveLock | t | f | |
> st.ctr_table_efr_oa
> (1 row)
>
> locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid |
> transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction |
> pid | mode | granted | fastpath | waitstart
> | relation
> ----------+----------+------------+------+-------+------------+---------------+---------+-------+----------+--------------------+---------+---------------------+---------+----------+-------------------------------+-----------
> relation | 529986 | 1842231489 | | | |
> | | | | 75/2193719 | 2128603 |
> AccessExclusiveLock | f | f | 2022-01-19
> 00:32:32.924694+01 | st.tpd_oa
> (1 row)
>
> locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid |
> transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction |
> pid | mode | granted | fastpath |
> waitstart | relation
> ---------------+----------+------------+------+-------+--------------+---------------+---------+-----------+----------+--------------------+---------+-----------------------+---------+----------+-------------------------------+-----------
> relation | 529986 | 1842231489 | | | |
> | | | | 165/1941408 |
> 2130531 | AccessShareLock | t | f |
> | st.tpd_oa
>
> So:
> pid 2130531 waits for an AccessShareLock on relation 1842228045,
> blocked by pid 2128603 which holds an AccessExclusiveLock
> pid 2128603 waits for an AccessExclusiveLock on relation 1842231489,
> blocked by pid 2130531 which holds an AccessShareLock
>
> The queries being executed by these backends are:
>
> pid | query_start | state_change
> | wait_event_type | wait_event | state |
> query
> ---------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------+------------+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2128603 | 2022-01-19 00:32:32.924413+01 | 2022-01-19
> 00:32:32.924413+01 | Lock | relation | active | DROP
> TABLE st.tpd_oa_18929
> 2130531 | 2022-01-19 00:32:32.625706+01 | 2022-01-19
> 00:32:32.625708+01 | Lock | relation | active | DELETE
> FROM st.ctr_table_efr_oa_19010 WHERE ropid = 44788868
> (2 rows)
>
> Both of these processes had been waiting for nearly 2 hours when I
> took the above printouts. My understanding of deadlock detection is
> that when a backend is waiting for a lock, it runs a deadlock
> detection function once a second so it should have been detected
> straight away but somehow it is not.
>
> Are there any deadlock conditions that postgresql is not able to detect?
>
> Note that there were a lot of other processes also waiting on relation
> 1842231489 - could that be confusing the deadlock detection routine?
>
> I am also confused about the locks which are being taken out by the
> DELETE query. Process 2130531 is trying to delete rows from a
> partition `st.ctr_table_efr_oa_19010`, and to do so it is trying to
> get an AccessShareLock on the parent table `st.ctr_table_efr_oa`. I
> don't really understand why that is, and in fact if I try to reproduce
> the deadlock manually by executing the relevant SQL in psql, the
> DELETE never tries to take out such a lock and no deadlock occurs.
>
> What are the circumstances where deleting rows directly from a
> partition will cause it to take a lock on the partitioned table?
>
> Any suggestions for debugging this issue would be most welcome.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Cheers
> Mike
