From: | Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Weird error |
Date: | 2001-06-28 21:57:21 |
Message-ID: | 3B3BA841.972DB490@selectacast.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
No, it was deadlocked. Neither vacuum nor my program were doing
anything.
Alex Pilosov wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Joseph Shraibman wrote:
>
> > Alex Pilosov wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > This is definitely FALSE. Vacuum does not lock the database, it acquires
> > > certain locks while its vacuuming certain tables. I.E. your clients may
> > > not be able to modify table while its being vacuumed.
> > >
> > I've had a vacuum deadlock my database. When I killed the vacuum client
> > (^C from the command line) my program continued.
>
> Are you sure you mean 'deadlock'? Deadlock is when neither client nor
> vacuum can proceed. What most likely happened is vacuum locking the table
> until its done, and that is a normal behavior.
>
> -alex
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
--
Joseph Shraibman
jks(at)selectacast(dot)net
Increase signal to noise ratio. http://www.targabot.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adam Haberlach | 2001-06-28 22:10:59 | Re: Re: useability of apache, PHP, Postgres for real business apps |
Previous Message | Oliver Elphick | 2001-06-28 21:34:19 | Re: About pg_dump |