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

Re: Autovacuum deadlock - bug or not?

From: "Mikael Carneholm" <Mikael(dot)Carneholm(at)WirelessCar(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Autovacuum deadlock - bug or not?
Date: 2005-11-17 15:20:44
Message-ID: 7F10D26ECFA1FB458B89C5B4B0D72C2B0A01E3@sesrv12.wirelesscar.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Forgot to mention: 

dfol=> select version();
                           version                           
-------------------------------------------------------------
 PostgreSQL 8.1.0 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC 2.96
(1 row)


-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: den 17 november 2005 16:04
To: Mikael Carneholm
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Autovacuum deadlock - bug or not? 


"Mikael Carneholm" <Mikael(dot)Carneholm(at)WirelessCar(dot)com> writes:
> variant: CLUSTER indexname ON tablename

Hmph.  Looking at the code, that should always lock the table first,
so I don't see where the problem is.  Would you look up the numbers
for us --- exactly which relations were involved in the deadlock,
and (if you can tell) which process was which?

Also, what PG version is this exactly?

			regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Matt CarterDate: 2005-11-17 15:38:15
Subject: Re: Huge query stalls at PARSE/BIND stage (2)
Previous:From: Mikael CarneholmDate: 2005-11-17 15:18:09
Subject: Re: Autovacuum deadlock - bug or not?

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