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

Re: Is Pg 7.0.x's Locking Mechanism BROKEN?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: frank <f(dot)callaghan(at)ieee(dot)org>
Cc: Fabrice Scemama <fabrices(at)ximmo(dot)ftd(dot)fr>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is Pg 7.0.x's Locking Mechanism BROKEN?
Date: 2000-07-27 20:23:14
Message-ID: 9089.964729394@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Frank and Fabrice,

If you aren't having any luck generating a reproducible example of this
problem, you might try recompiling the backend with LOCK_DEBUG defined
in src/include/config.h --- or just do
	gmake clean
	gmake PROFILE=-DLOCK_DEBUG all
This should produce pretty voluminous quantities of info in the
postmaster's stdout/stderr log.  Run the postmaster with -d2 so we
can see the related queries too, and then maybe the log will have enough
info to tell something useful the next time you see it happen.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joe BrennerDate: 2000-07-27 20:44:52
Subject: Re: Inprise InterBase(R) 6.0 Now Free and Open Source
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-07-27 20:14:20
Subject: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Chris JonesDate: 2000-07-27 23:59:00
Subject: Re: 4 billion record limit?
Previous:From: Jesus AneirosDate: 2000-07-27 20:02:16
Subject: Re:

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