Re: Fun fact about autovacuum and orphan temp tables

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Grigory Smolkin <g(dot)smolkin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fun fact about autovacuum and orphan temp tables
Date: 2016-09-05 13:34:40
Message-ID: 20160905133440.GA671130@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Grigory Smolkin wrote:

> Funny part is that it never drops them. So when backend is finally
> terminated, it tries to drop them and fails with error:
>
> FATAL: out of shared memory
> HINT: You might need to increase max_locks_per_transaction
>
> If I understand that rigth, we are trying to drop all these temp tables in
> one transaction and running out of locks to do so.

Hmm, yeah, I suppose it does that, and it does seem pretty inconvenient.
It is certainly pointless to hold onto these locks for temp tables. I
wonder how ugly would be to fix this problem ...

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ildar Musin 2016-09-05 13:38:54 Re: Index Onlys Scan for expressions
Previous Message Vik Fearing 2016-09-05 13:13:15 Re: Fun fact about autovacuum and orphan temp tables