| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, daveg(at)sonic(dot)net |
| Subject: | Re: lock AccessShareLock on object 0/1260/0 is already held |
| Date: | 2013-01-04 16:54:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20766.1357318482@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> What is state of this issue?
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-09/msg00423.php
AFAICS we never identified the cause. It was pretty clear that
something was failing to clean up shared-memory lock data structures,
but not what that something was. The last productive suggestion was
to add process-exit-time logging of whether unreleased locks remain,
but if Dave ever did that, he didn't report back what he found.
Maybe you could add such logging on your machines.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-01-04 17:08:35 | Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-01-04 16:42:07 | Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction |