| 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: | 2011-09-07 22:35:08 |
| Message-ID: | 7564.1315434908@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> writes:
> It does not seem restricted to pg_authid:
> 2011-08-24 18:35:57.445 24987 c23 apps ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16403/2615/0
> And I think I've seen it on other tables too.
Hmm. 2615 = pg_namespace, which most likely is the first catalog
accessed by just about any SQL command that's going to access tables at
all, so I suspect that this is mostly just a "the first access failed"
thing and not something peculiar to pg_namespace. But we still don't
have a clue why the locks are not getting released by the previous
owner of the PGPROC slot. Have you trawled your logs to see if there's
any sign of any distress at all, shortly before the problem starts to
happen?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | daveg | 2011-09-07 23:01:10 | Re: FATAL: lock AccessShareLock on object 0/1260/0 is already held |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-09-07 22:25:23 | Re: FATAL: lock AccessShareLock on object 0/1260/0 is already held |