Lock - relation
The relation
event occurs when a query is waiting to acquire a lock on a table or view (relation) that’s currently locked by another transaction.
Most PostgreSQL commands implicitly use locks to control concurrent access to data in tables. You can also use these locks explicitly in your application code with the LOCK
command. Many lock modes aren’t compatible with each other, and they can block transactions when they’re trying to access the same object. When this happens, PostgreSQL generates a relation
event. Some common examples are the following:
- Exclusive locks such as
ACCESS EXCLUSIVE
can block all concurrent access. Data definition language (DDL) operations such asDROP TABLE
,TRUNCATE
, andCLUSTER
acquireACCESS EXCLUSIVE
locks implicitly.ACCESS EXCLUSIVE
is also the default lock mode forLOCK TABLE
statements that don’t specify a mode explicitly. - Using
CREATE INDEX (without CONCURRENT)
on a table conflicts with data manipulation language (DML) statementsUPDATE
,DELETE
, andINSERT
, which acquireROW EXCLUSIVE
locks.
For more information about table-level locks and conflicting lock modes, see Explicit Locking in the PostgreSQL documentation.
Blocking queries and transactions typically unblock in one of the following ways:
- Blocking query – The application can cancel the query or the user can end the process. The engine can also force the query to end because of a session’s statement-timeout or a deadlock detection mechanism.
- Blocking transaction – A transaction stops blocking when it runs a
ROLLBACK
orCOMMIT
statement. Rollbacks also happen automatically when sessions are disconnected by a client or by network issues, or are ended. Sessions can be ended when the database engine is shut down, when the system is out of memory, and so forth.
When the relation
event occurs more frequently than normal, it can indicate a performance issue. Typical causes include the following:
-
Increased concurrent sessions with conflicting table locks
There might be an increase in the number of concurrent sessions with queries that lock the same table with conflicting locking modes.
-
Maintenance operations
Health maintenance operations such as
VACUUM
andANALYZE
can significantly increase the number of conflicting locks.ANALYZE
acquires aSHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE
lock. This type of lock can cause arelation
wait event. Application data maintenance operations such as refreshing a materialized view can also increase blocked queries and transactions. -
Locks on reader instances
There might be a conflict between the relation locks held by the writer and readers. Currently, only
ACCESS EXCLUSIVE
relation locks are replicated to reader instances. However, theACCESS EXCLUSIVE
relation lock will conflict with anyACCESS SHARE
relation locks held by the reader. This can cause an increase in lock relation wait events on the reader.
We recommend different actions depending on the causes of your wait event.
To reduce the impact of blocking SQL statements, modify your application code where possible. Following are two common techniques for reducing blocks:
-
Use the
NOWAIT
option – Some SQL commands, such asSELECT
andLOCK
statements, support this option. TheNOWAIT
directive cancels the lock-requesting query if the lock can’t be acquired immediately. This technique can help prevent a blocking session from causing a pile-up of blocked sessions behind it.For example: Assume that transaction A is waiting on a lock held by transaction B. Now, if B requests a lock on a table that’s locked by transaction C, transaction A might be blocked until transaction C completes. But if transaction B uses a
NOWAIT
when it requests the lock on C, it can fail fast and ensure that transaction A doesn’t have to wait indefinitely. -
Use
SET lock_timeout
– Set alock_timeout
value to limit the time a SQL statement waits to acquire a lock on a relation. If the lock isn’t acquired within the timeout specified, the transaction requesting the lock is cancelled. Set this value at the session level.
Maintenance operations such as VACUUM
and ANALYZE
are important. We recommend that you don’t turn them off because you find relation
wait events related to these maintenance operations. The following approaches can minimize the effect of these operations:
- Run maintenance operations manually during off-peak hours.
- To reduce
relation
waits caused by autoanalyze tasks, perform any needed autoanalyze tuning.
You can see how concurrent sessions on a writer and readers might be holding locks that block each other. One way to do this is by running queries that return the lock type and relation. In the table you can find a sequence of queries to two such concurrent sessions, a writer session (left-hand column) and a reader session (right-hand column).
The replay process waits for the duration of max_standby_streaming_delay
before cancelling the reader query. As shown in the example, the lock timeout of 100ms is well below the default max_standby_streaming_delay
of 30 seconds. The lock times out before it’s an issue.
Session | Explanation |
---|---|
master=> CREATE TABLE t1(b integer); | The writer session creates table t1 on the writer instance. The ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock is acquired on the writer immediately, assuming that there are no conflicting queries on the writer. |
standby=> SET lock_timeout=100; | The reader session sets a lock timeout interval of 100 milliseconds. |
standby=> SELECT * FROM t1; b — (0 rows) |
The reader session tries to read data from table t1 on the reader instance. |
master=> BEGIN; master=> DROP TABLE t1; |
The writer session drops t1 . |
standby=> SELECT * FROM t1; ERROR: canceling statement due to lock timeout LINE 1: SELECT * FROM t1; ^ |
The query times out and is canceled on the reader. |
standby=> SELECT locktype, relation, mode, backend_type FROM pg_locks l, pg_stat_activity t1 WHERE l.pid=t1.pid AND relation = ’t1’::regclass::oid; locktype |relation |mode |backend_type ———-+———-+———————+——————- relation |68628525 |AccessExclusiveLock |startup (1 row) |
The reader session queries pg_locks and pg_stat_activity to determine the cause of the error. The result indicates that the startup process is holding an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on table t1 . |