Re: PG 8.3.3 - ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16385/16467/0 is already held

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Milligan <milli(at)acmeps(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG 8.3.3 - ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16385/16467/0 is already held
Date: 2008-12-29 14:35:52
Message-ID: 20081229143552.GF4545@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Tom Lane wrote:
> [ reincluding the mailing list ]
>
> Michael Milligan <milli(at)acmeps(dot)com> writes:
> > Okay, it reproduces and surprise surprise nLocks does overflow...
>
> > ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16385/16467/0 is already held
> > lock(0x87408a028) id(16385,16467,0,0,0,1) grantMask(a) waitMask(0)
> > req(2,0,1,0,0,0,0,0)=3 grant(1,0,1,0,0,0,0,0)=2 wait(0)
> > proclock(0x8743a7508) lock(0x87408a028) method(1) proc(0x8743aada8) hold(a)
> > locallock(0xb29c78) nLocks(-2147483648) nOwners(2) mOwners(8)
>
> Hah. Okay, that shows that we'd never have reproduced it with a small
> test case.

This hasn't been fixed yet, has it? Do you have any ideas on how to
actually fix the problem? I wonder if it looks like enlarging nLocks,
or you're intending to attempt to reduce the number of locks taken.

A customer of ours started hitting this bug too, last week.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-12-29 15:06:18 Re: PG 8.3.3 - ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16385/16467/0 is already held
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2008-12-29 10:51:54 Re: BUG #4596: information_schema.table_privileges is way too slow