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

Re: Deadlocks ?

From: kevin kempter <kevin(at)kevinkempterllc(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tino Schwarze <postgresql(at)tisc(dot)de>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Deadlocks ?
Date: 2008-05-13 23:33:27
Message-ID: 506ECCFC-6568-4CD3-B4AF-25A860D97859@kevinkempterllc.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
On May 13, 2008, at 5:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Tino Schwarze <postgresql(at)tisc(dot)de> writes:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 01:18:24PM -0600, kevin kempter wrote:
>> ProgrammingError: deadlock detected
>> DETAIL:  Process 23098 waits for ShareUpdateExclusiveLock on
>> relation 428126 of database 427376; blocked by process 23916.
>> Process 23916 waits for ShareLock on transaction 46802680; blocked
>> by process 23098.
>
>> I've never figured out how to resolve the "lock on transaction" to
>> something understandable...
>
> It's presumably waiting for a row lock that the other transaction
> has got.  We don't keep enough information about row locks in memory
> to give a better error message (because we could run out of memory
> if we tried :-()
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>

If that's true does it make sense to play with a timeout value (I  
assume the timeout is configurable somewhere in postgresql.conf) in an  
effort to tune for this ?



/Kevin





> -- 
> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin


In response to

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-05-14 00:49:33
Subject: Re: Deadlocks ?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-05-13 23:00:28
Subject: Re: Deadlocks ?

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