Re: Deadlock? idle in transaction

On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 08:26:48PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> You evidently have some client applications holding open transactions

Okay, I know where to look for that. Thanks.

> that have locks on some tables. That's not a deadlock --- at least,

It is no deadlock if the transaction holding the lock remains idle and does
nothing. But I cannot imagine how this could happen.

What happens if there is a real deadlock, i.e. the transaction holding the
lock tries to lock a table vacuum already locked? Ah, I just checked and
rendered my last mail useless. It appears the backend does correctly detect
the deadlock and kill one transaction.

> it's not Postgres' fault. The VACUUM is waiting to get exclusive access
> to some table that's held by one of these clients, and the COPY is
> probably queued up behind the VACUUM.

So the reason is that the transaction does hold a lock but does not advance
any further?

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael(at)Fam-Meskes(dot)De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!