Database performance can feel like a dark art, especially when faced with slowdowns caused by a hidden force: database locks. In PostgreSQL, locks are the unsung heroes of data integrity, the guardians ensuring your transactions run correctly in a busy, multi-user world. But when misunderstood or mismanaged, these guardians can turn into gatekeepers, causing queues, waits, and frustrating performance bottlenecks.

If you’ve ever stared at a “query waiting” message or battled unexplained application sluggishness, understanding PostgreSQL locks is a critical step towards a faster, more reliable system.

This article demystifies the world of PostgreSQL locks. We’ll explore the different types, understand why they are essential, see how they solve critical concurrency problems, and dive into real-world examples. Crucially, we’ll also confront the demons: the performance issues locks can cause in production and how to start diagnosing them.

What are PostgreSQL Locks and Why are They Essential?

At its heart, locking is a mechanism to manage concurrency. When multiple transactions try to read and write the same data simultaneously, how do you prevent chaos? How do you ensure that one transaction doesn’t overwrite another’s work (lost updates) or read incomplete data (dirty reads)?

This is where PostgreSQL’s sophisticated locking system comes in. It acts like a traffic controller, ensuring that transactions interact with data in an orderly and safe manner, thereby upholding the ACID (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) properties that guarantee data integrity.

Importance:

Data Integrity: Prevents conflicting operations from corrupting your data.
Consistency: Ensures that transactions see a consistent view of the database.
Isolation: Makes concurrent transactions appear as if they are running one after another.

The Problem They Solve:

Without locks, you’d face a world of data anomalies:

Dirty reads: Reading data that has been modified but not yet committed (and might be rolled back).
Non-Repeatable Reads: Getting different results when reading the same row multiple times within one transaction because another transaction modified it.
Phantom Reads: Seeing new rows appear (or disappear) in a query result set because another transaction added (or removed) them.
Lost Updates: When two transactions read the same value, both modify it, and one write overwrites the other, effectively losing one update.

PostgreSQL’s locking prevents these scenarios by making transactions wait when they try to access data in a way that conflicts with an existing lock.

The Cast of Characters: Types of PostgreSQL Locks

PostgreSQL uses a hierarchy of locks, primarily at the table level, but also implicitly at the row level. It features a variety of lock modes, ranging from very permissive to completely exclusive. Let’s break down the most important ones:

1. ACCESS SHARE

Acquired By: SELECT statements.
Purpose: Allows reading data without modification. This is the most lenient lock.
Conflicts With: ACCESS EXCLUSIVE. (Many readers can coexist.)

2. ROW SHARE

Acquired By: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE, SELECT ... FOR SHARE.
Purpose: Indicates an intent to lock specific rows while reading.
Conflicts With: EXCLUSIVE, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE.

3. ROW EXCLUSIVE

Acquired By: INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE.
Purpose: Used when modifying data. This is the most common lock you’ll see with write operations.
Conflicts With: SHARE, SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE, EXCLUSIVE, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE. (Multiple ROW EXCLUSIVE Locks can coexist if they affect different rows.)

4. SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE

Acquired By: VACUUM (non-FULL), ANALYZE, some ALTER TABLE variants (like adding a column with a default without a full table rewrite).
Purpose: Used for maintenance or schema changes that shouldn’t block regular reads/writes, but shouldn’t run concurrently with other similar maintenance tasks.
Conflicts With: SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE, SHARE, SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE, EXCLUSIVE, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE.

5. SHARE

Acquired By: CREATE INDEX (when not using the CONCURRENTLY option).
Purpose: Prevents any data modifications while it’s held, ensuring a consistent state (e.g., for building an index).
Conflicts With: ROW EXCLUSIVE, SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE, SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE, EXCLUSIVE, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE.

6. SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE

Acquired By: Rarely used automatically, can be acquired explicitly with LOCK TABLE.
Purpose: A stronger version of SHARE It blocks concurrent ROW EXCLUSIVE writes.
Conflicts With: ROW SHARE, ROW EXCLUSIVE, SHARE, SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE, EXCLUSIVE, ACCESS EXCLUSIVE.

7. EXCLUSIVE

Acquired By: Explicit LOCK TABLE (default mode if none specified).
Purpose: A strong lock that blocks all other operations except simple reads (ACCESS SHARE).
Conflicts With: All except ACCESS SHARE.

8. ACCESS EXCLUSIVE

Acquired By: DROP TABLE, TRUNCATE, VACUUM FULLMost ALTER TABLE operations.
Purpose: The “super” lock. It blocks all other operations, including reads. Often, the culprit is production-wide waits.
Conflicts With: ALL other locks.

Key Points:

Row-Level Locks: When you UPDATE or DELETE a row uses SELECT ... FOR UPDATE PostgreSQL acquires a ROW EXCLUSIVE lock on the table and an implicit lock on the specific row being modified. It's these row locks that allow multiple UPDATEs to run concurrently if they affect different rows.

Advisory Locks: These are application-level locks. PostgreSQL manages them, but their meaning is defined by your application. Great for things like ensuring only one instance of a background job runs at a time, without needing a dedicated table.

Real-Life Scenarios: Locks in the Wild

Simple Read (SELECT): Acquires ACCESS SHARE. Many readers can happily coexist.
Simple Write (UPDATE): Acquires ROW EXCLUSIVE. Multiple writers can coexist if they touch different rows. If they try to update the same row, one will wait.
Inventory Management (SELECT ... FOR UPDATE):

BEGIN;
SELECT quantity FROM products WHERE id = 123 FOR UPDATE; - (Acquires ROW SHARE on table, locks row 123)

If quantity > 0, update, commit.

This ensures no two transactions can try to sell the last item simultaneously.

Schema Migration (ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN ...) : This often requires ACCESS EXCLUSIVE. This means no other query (read or write) can run on that table while the ALTER is in progress. This is a common source of production downtime!
5. Unique Background Job (pg_advisory_lock):
- SELECT pg_advisory_lock(12345); (Tries to acquire a lock identified by '12345')
- If successful, run the job. Release with pg_advisory_unlock.
- Another instance trying pg_advisory_lock(12345) will wait, preventing duplicate runs.

The Dark Side: Production Problems & Lock Contention ⚠️

While necessary, locks are a primary source of performance headaches in production.

Lock Contention/Blocking: This is the most common issue. A long-running transaction (e.g., a large UPDATE or an ALTER TABLE) holds a strong lock, and many other queries pile up behind it, waiting.

Diagnosis: Check the pg_locks view and pg_stat_activity view (especially looking at wait_event_type = 'Lock' and wait_event). Look for queries with old query_start times holding locks.

2. Deadlocks: Transaction A waits for a lock held by B, and Transaction B waits for a lock held by A. Neither can proceed.

Example: Tx A locks row 1, then tries to lock row 2. Tx B locks row 2, then tries to lock row 1.
Diagnosis: PostgreSQL is good at detecting deadlocks and will terminate one transaction, usually logging the event. Check your logs!
Solution: Ensure transactions acquire locks in a consistent order, use shorter transactions, and handle potential errors gracefully.

3. ACCESS EXCLUSIVE Nightmares: Applying schema changes during peak hours can bring your application to a standstill.

Solution: Plan migrations carefully, use tools like pg_repack, leverage CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, and perform changes during low-traffic windows. Use SET lock_timeout to prevent ALTER commands from waiting indefinitely and blocking others.

4. Long-Running Transactions: Even a read-only transaction can hold an ACCESS SHARE lock, which can prevent some ALTER TABLE operations. Long write transactions are worse, holding ROW EXCLUSIVE locks and potentially blocking many others.

Solution: Keep transactions short and focused. Avoid user interaction within transactions. Monitor pg_stat_activity for long-running queries.

5. Index Issues: Missing indexes can cause queries to scan many more rows than necessary, increasing the chance of lock contention and extending transaction times.

Master Your Locks, Master Your Performance!

Understanding PostgreSQL locks isn’t just an academic exercise; it’s a vital skill for building and maintaining high-performance, reliable applications. By grasping how locks work, the conflicts they cause, and how to diagnose issues, you can move from being a victim of database contention to a master of concurrency.

What’s your worst lock-related production horror story? Or do you have a go-to tip for diagnosing lock waits in PostgreSQL?

Dive into the comments below! Share your experiences and questions — let’s build a shared knowledge base.
Found this deep dive useful? Give it some claps 👏 and share it! Help your fellow developers navigate the tricky waters of database locks.
Follow me on Hashnode for more insights into PostgreSQL, database performance, and building robust systems.
Want tips like these in your inbox? Subscribe to our newsletter [Your Newsletter Link Here] and stay ahead of database performance issues.

Don’t let locks lock down your application — understand them, manage them, and unlock your database’s true potential!

Untangling PostgreSQL Locks: Your Guide to Conquering Database Contention

Table of contents