Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: FATAL: lock AccessShareLock on object 0/1260/0 is already held

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: FATAL: lock AccessShareLock on object 0/1260/0 is already held
Date: 2011-09-08 15:31:51
Message-ID: 23117.1315495911@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 09:02:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> writes:
>>> The first version we saw it on was 8.4.7.

>> Yeah, you said that.  I was wondering what you'd last run before 8.4.7.

> Sorry, misunderstood. We were previously running 8.4.4, but have been on 8.4.7
> since shortly after it was released. Prior to that we have had all the major
> and most of the minor releases since 7.1.

Well, I groveled through the commit logs from 8.4.4 to 8.4.7, and
I can't find anything that looks like it could possibly be related.
So at this point I'm inclined to think that the bug is older than
that, but your usage patterns changed so that you started to tickle it.

Can you think of any changes in your usage that might date to around
that time, and would somehow be connected to backend startup/shutdown?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ants AasmaDate: 2011-09-08 15:33:00
Subject: Re: concurrent snapshots
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-09-08 15:28:28
Subject: Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group