Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> In any case, now that we know that nLocks overflow is actually possible
>> within real-world transaction lengths, it'd behoove us to do something
>> about that in 8.4 or beyond.
> Is this a TODO?
Yes, although I'm still waiting for more info from Michael.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2008-09-07 14:49:36|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4407: Bug in PQexecPrepared when using an integer primary key that does not start at 1 |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2008-09-07 13:06:02|
|Subject: Re: PG 8.3.3 - ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object
16385/16467/0 is already held|