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

Re: Deadlock with pg_dump?

From: Chris Campbell <chris(at)bignerdranch(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Deadlock with pg_dump?
Date: 2006-10-26 22:11:59
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On Oct 26, 2006, at 17:21, Tom Lane wrote:

> And what was 1171 doing?  I really doubt that either of these could  
> have
> been pg_dump.

I know that process 1120 is a Java client (Hibernate) running an  
UPDATE query, but I have no idea what 1171 is. I doubt that 1171 was  
pg_dump, but when we turn off the pg_dump cron jobs (for 12-ish  
hours), the deadlocks go away. We usually see 5 or 6 deadlocks spread  
throughout the day. That's not definitive evidence, of course, but  
it's certainly curious.

> Given that you appear to be running 8.1 (tut-tut for not saying), it
> really shouldn't be a foreign key problem either.  I'm betting these
> are just flat out conflicting updates of the same row(s).

Yeah, 8.1.3. Sorry about the omission.

Is there additional logging information I can turn on to get more  
details? I guess I need to see exactly what locks both processes  
hold, and what queries they were running when the deadlock occurred?  
Is that easily done, without turning on logging for *all* statements?


- Chris

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2006-10-26 22:26:40
Subject: Re: Replication documentation addition
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-10-26 21:59:14
Subject: Re: plperl/plperlu interaction

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2006-10-26 22:29:11
Subject: Re: Deadlock with pg_dump?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-10-26 21:37:47
Subject: Re: GUC description cleanup

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group