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

Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Dorochevsky,Michel" <michel(dot)dorochevsky(at)softcon(dot)de>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
Date: 2007-04-27 08:31:06
Message-ID: 4631B4CA.80005@enterprisedb.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm still not very sure why you're hitting the problem more often than
> other people.  There might be some tweak you could make in your
> application code to dodge the issue.

The initial size of the local lock hash table is 128. That's a lot of 
locks, most applications probably don't use that many locks and 
therefore avoid the issue.

-- 
   Heikki Linnakangas
   EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-04-27 08:44:16
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-04-27 08:10:59
Subject: Re: BUG #3256: msi installer failed to upgrade to newer version

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