| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuumdb hanging database cluster |
| Date: | 2004-07-27 01:00:26 |
| Message-ID: | 15438.1090890026@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> writes:
>>> I tracked down the process that was "idle in transaction" and it
>>> was a pg_dump process running on another machine.
>>
>> What was it waiting on?
> Beats the heck out of me. We periodically dump some selected small
> tables via a script using:
> pg_dump -i -h $dbhost -U $dbuser -t $dumptable > dumpfile
> It's very vanilla and generally works fine but sometimes (perhaps 1
> per 1000+ runs) ends up idle in transaction. I'm going to take a much
> closer look at pg_locks next time it happens.
If it is "idle in transaction" and not "<something> waiting" then it is
not blocked waiting for someone's lock, so pg_locks is unlikely to yield
the answer. I think it's got to be something funny on the pg_dump side.
Or maybe a communications problem?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-27 01:09:12 | Re: estimating table size |
| Previous Message | Ian Barwick | 2004-07-26 22:39:06 | Re: estimating table size |